John Phipps: China’s Zero-Covid Policy Isn’t New, It Actually Has a Gruesome Precedent

The zero-Covid strategy by the Chinese government is slowing their economy. In a rare admission, officials have lowered their GDP growth estimate, almost totally based on cities that aren’t working, especially ports.

The zero-Covid strategy by the Chinese government is slowing their economy. In a rare admission, officials have lowered their GDP growth estimate significantly, almost totally based on cities that aren’t working, especially ports.

This approach to contain the virus has been controversial with epidemiologists and doctors, and while seeming to be effective early in the pandemic, isolating cities has proven very hard and costly. Coupled with the lower effectiveness of Chinese vaccines and government refusal to use Western mNRA versions, zero-Covid shows little hope for improving their economic and pubic health future.

When it was first announced at the beginning of the pandemic, I was struck by how draconian and difficult to administer this policy was.

Recently I discovered such absolute isolation has a gruesome precedent. During the Great Leap Forward in 1958-62, China collectivized agriculture with truly disastrous results. Not only did production plummet as peasants were herded into collectives, but Mao Zedong insisted on continuing to export badly needed grain to keep up appearances of success. Of course, party officials were reporting grossly inflated harvest numbers to meet impossible goals demanded by the government.

Over that time historians have estimated 20-30 million Chinese starved, making it the largest man-made famine in history. Recent releases of local records have many historians raising that figure as high as 50 million unnecessary deaths. But medical experts have been puzzled why that famished population did not experience widespread plagues and diseases due to their weakened condition. The reason was what we are seeing now – immediate and total isolation of populations reporting such diseases.

This dictatorial approach is a tactic still in living memory for China, and as devastating as it was and is, may not be enough for Covid. Unlike in the 60’s however, China’s harsh treatment of its own people will have a substantial impact on the global economy as it will provide one-fifth, the largest share of global economic growth in the next 5 years.

With a million lives lost here in the U.S., we have our own sorry Covid history, but China’s on-going difficulty could soon spill into their politics. Watch the subtle and rare public debate between Premier Li Keqiang and Xi Jinping for clues.

The Packer logo (567x120)
Related Stories
In what it calls a comprehensive action plan for agriculture security, USDA unveiled seven critical areas the Trump administration will address, and securing and protecting U.S. farmland from being owned by China topped that list.
The majority of respondents in the March Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor agree the U.S. is currently in a trade war, but who wins? Ag economists say it’s not the U.S., Canada or Mexico but rather Brazil that could come out on top.
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday that his proposed 25% tariffs on Mexican and Canadian goods will go into effect on March 4 and threatened an extra 10% duty on Chinese imports.
Read Next
Industry leaders outline how retailers can maximize the 90-day sweet cherry sales window through aggressive early promotions and strategic late-season displays.
Get Daily News
GET MARKET ALERTS
Get News & Markets App