 Yeah, we're back. We're live. I'm J. Fidel. This is Stink Deck. It's the one o'clock clock on a given Thursday. We're talking global connections today. We're talking about vaccines for the world with a worldly person indeed. Carlos Juarez who joins us here from Honolulu because he is now affiliated with the East West Center. And that's a very worldly organization. Hi Carlos. Good day. Good to see you J. Always. And, you know, we've been connecting so many years as I've been, well, from different parts of the world. Happy to say I'm back home after a very long journey that's taking me to Europe, to India, to Mexico, to Texas, but back home at long last year. And again, as we've been doing a number of different shows, you know, looking at the evolving dynamics of the vaccine program now, the challenge of the pandemic. And it's interesting you think right now in the US in some ways. I saw reading an article earlier, making a reference to the United States being the first major country to enter a post pandemic world if we can even call it that but obviously the vaccine program here in the last month or two has certainly moved forward substantially. And so what we're now seeing as well and given the recent meetings in Europe last week to be seven some in particular efforts by the US and other world leaders to try to promise and roll out more vaccines to the other world, the rest of the world and and it's a you know it's important it's something obviously there's a there's a moral imperative. It's the inequality of you know the wealthy countries that have up to now afforded everything, but it remains a challenge in some places the African particular some other parts of the developing world where, you know it's one thing to promise the vaccines it's another thing to really make it happen and and for these places that have pretty weak institutions and capacity to begin with, you know how they're going to be able to move it forward but that's where we are. Yeah, so what's in it for the US let's assume that Joe Biden is able to, you know produce and deliver millions, hundreds of millions of vaccine doses around the world, especially to, you know, undeveloped countries where they they are in desperate need. What's in it for us. Well, I mean on one hand you can see it's for us foreign policy as long had an important role in, let's say providing international aid international support, I mean looking after World War two the US took the lead in helping rebuild Europe, you know the American plan and the like, even in an earlier major pandemic actually some interesting lessons from the polio vaccine that was developed in the US late 40s into the 50s. While it is a success story of a vaccination there's a lot of stumbling that went along to in the early stages of that issue. But more immediately right now what we have is an interesting, you know, dynamic of the UK the United Kingdom Boris Johnson has pledged 100 million doses over the next year and the US under Biden has made a pledge of contributing 500 million doses, which would be the single largest donation of COVID vaccines by any country yet. It is part of our US foreign policy obviously to you know, sort of, you know, again whether you want to call it a humanitarian gesture development assistance. Now, some will always look at it in more cynical ways maybe it's the two political and the game the big plate, you know, playing off Russia or China, there are elements of that of course, but at the end of the day to with the US moving into vaccination program at some point how can you justify having a massive stockpile in the US is not alone many other wealthy countries, literally bought out the supply. And then you look at the poor developing countries of the world they remain, you know, completely, you know, out of reach still, it's just now beginning, but it's going to be you know probably some time before we see the actual impact. The bottom line is that there's a lot of dread growing in some of the very poorest countries in the world, as we see virus cases surging more contagious variants that are, you know, taking hold and crippling the shortage of vaccines. So there's a lot of challenges still out there and I think it's important for us I mean, we have to look beyond where we are. So whether our individual states or the nation is doing extra why. I think one of the challenges that we're going to see is that, while it's one thing to make promises and offer as we see now, it's going to remain a challenge for many of these poor developing countries to actually implement and carry out the vaccine program the capacity remains weak. And, you know, again, it's a work in progress so we're going to continue to see challenges. I'm sure we're going to see challenges and I think the world will understand that. In other words, they're not going to, they're not going to hold his feet to the fire and immediate delivery. But I think, you know, a couple of thoughts worth mentioning Carlos and that is, you know, since the Second World War the United States has been the leader of the free world. It has set the liberal world order. It has it brought rationality to many irrational situations leadership role. You know, high water or low water good president or bad we, we have retained that all these years until Trump, when he specifically declined to be the leader of the free world and, and, you know, dumped on our allies this really. Now you knew at the time there would be implications and consequences to that. And I think one of the consequences has been that the world has question has come to question whether we are still the leader of the free world. It's a legitimate question, because you know what Trump was doing was backing off that and you know it's hard for some country in Europe to continue to feel that way. This are all waiting around for Trump to go. Now he's gone and you have a rational human being in the office of President of the United States, who understands this. Who says, hmm, we have the legacy of being a leader of the free world why don't we step up to that. Now this is the perfect way to do it not only visiting Europe not only talking, some kind of rational discussion with with Vladimir Putin but also actually putting your money where your mouth is. And I think it's the Marshall plan of 2021 is going to buy us its soft power, you know, in pure form soft power, and it's going to buy us goodwill everywhere. And what, and what does that mean I like to ask you about that what does that mean in terms of our ability to do multilateral strategies with China and with Russia. And these are these things are not directly involving China or Russia and yet, and yet they do have a likely effect what would you talk about that please. Oh absolutely and I think you know as you've mentioned this term soft power we just want to reiterate what that refers to traditionally when we look at global politics. The decision that the hard politics to be the given take the geopolitics, the sort of military defense, you know, economic soft power is a bit more diffuse and it's maybe, you know, things that we do to attract others to us or maybe more in aspects of cultural diplomacy, for example, or, you know, providing again development assistance. You know, it's the aspects of soft power but people will debate you know how much it is really, but clearly the US under the new president is trying to reengage and bring back American diplomacy. There is a challenge and we don't know how to measure that how much is the legacy or the impact of the previous administration. In other words, is there more cynicism is there more skepticism. And that aside, I'm going to say, certainly with the vaccine at the end of the day, it's, it's going to be where the proof is in the pudding as you say in other words if you ask is specifically giving donations to X or Y country. Suddenly that becomes the issue and I can tell you having been most recently in Mexico, for example, Kamala Harris visits, and she comes basically providing some, some, you know, some specific vaccine. That's a positive story. Mexico has more vaccines boom and it is a positive story it does help improve the image no doubt. I guess what I want to suggest is people at the end are just, you know, since this is about the vaccine, where is it and what is it and how is it going to help us. So I think there's an opportunity for the US to this is in effect like you suggested that the new Marshall plan of sorts. I think there's going to be also a healthy skepticism moreover comes on top of a set of diplomatic and geopolitical interest particularly the Chinese who have been pushing a lot of their vaccines in a lot of developing countries in Africa and Asia and in Latin America in particular. Well, again, it's an ongoing it is geopolitical. It is, it has aspects of the sort of hard power, because it is that game but ultimately this is really the US soft power trying to gain, you know, I guess a positive image for the to prove it and it's not an easy task given given what we saw transpire past administration. And the other aspect, which we should never ever forget, there's been a lot of writing about this is that we're not we're not over with with the pandemic. We're not over with COVID. And even if we were over with COVID there's another COVID in the pipeline that is going to come and bite us soon. It's the way it is in the world you know it's what we've done to the environment. It's the, the, the vectors the animal vectors that have spilled the virus over into our communities because because we've made it impossible for them to live in their communities. So they're closer to our communities, and they carry, they carry various viruses I mean fast for example carry thousands of viruses and all you need is one. You have a pandemic. So, we can't forget that and there are a lot of people who will find that we're in a kind of state of pandemic now. It's going to last for a while and in our lifetimes. I suggest to you Carlos will will be saddled with coronavirus or some other similar virus for the rest of our lives. We'll have to take shots and I'm happy to see that, that there are, there are companies out there they're, they're putting the vaccine in pills, which will be a tremendous improvement shots. And you know, and the America will be a leading feature in the in the biotechnology in the pharmaceutical technology that allows us to do this. However, however, if you have a certain percentage of the community and we still do have a substantial percentage of the American population that either doesn't want to or can't take a vaccine. There's no other risk of infection about people, you know, in people who are unable to take a vaccine, you know, and the other is that you have a substantially enhanced risk of variants that will break through the vaccine. And luckily, you know, they say that most of the two shot vaccines, I guess that means Pfizer, you know, are able to deal with the Delta variant that has come to us from India. But there might be another one that will, I'm going to say there will be another one, if we have the whole developing world involving hundreds of millions of people, billions of people who have not been vaccinated. And in their cases among their cases is just natural law, there will be new variants. And what happened in 1918 and 19 was that we sent the Spanish flu off to Europe. And it did very well there and then when our troops came back in 1918 they brought the new version back and then we had even a more serious epidemic in the United States. So I'm only suggesting all of this because I think that it is in our interest to limit the number of cases everywhere in the world because that is a limitation of the possibility of variants. Sure. Yeah, the bottom line is looking in health tech experts and different world leaders have been warning this, even if the rich nations immunize all their people and you know maybe not all but a substantial you know herd immunity all that. The pandemic will not be defeated if the virus is allowed to spread in countries that are starved the vaccines and so there's a compelling case where we need to address it and again, the challenges in many parts of the world it could be an Africa in Latin America, Asia, etc. But I would add that Africa is especially vulnerable this is a continent where you know they've got over 1.3 billion people, maybe 18% of the population but the same place has only received about 2% of the vaccines that have been administered globally so it has been a few countries have yet to dispense a single shot. And, you know, again, just this is one of those global issues that is not going to go away until we address it globally. The opportunities there to now even to foster more collaboration and cooperation, even among parties that say the US China the US Russia where we have pensions and difficulties. So if you do need to cooperate and coordinate on something like this, it's in everybody's interest. This is a global issue that transcends borders and then the like. And so gosh, you know, let's hope that we can bring together our collective abilities. And that's one thing of a little concern is that the US, you know, going to give away half a billion doses and all that. But as you mentioned, China has been giving away doses and for that matter, until it had its own, you know, a very problem India was giving away doses and Russia, you know, I don't know how good their technology is they were giving away doses and small. And the question is, you know, how do we, there's a competition, isn't there in a given country. I mean, for example, China has a huge presence in Africa, where they needed badly. Yeah, China wanted to do soft power in Africa, it'd be so easy for them to go into countries they already have a much more significant presence there than we do. You know, their presence is building harbors and dams and infrastructure, ours is sending NGOs and it's different. And, you know, unless we keep up with them, that competition, we're not going to be able to really succeed in that competition so time is of the essence. And it's the nature of the way we do this. And in fact, there is a competition, don't you agree. Yeah, there is. And even, let me say a couple months back what we saw more was this example of what we call the vaccine nationalism countries were sort of, you know, circling the wagon and kind of looking out for their own narrow interest. Okay, the dynamics are changing and this last summit meeting this past week that each seven countries was quite important because it was a meeting that helped to feed up a focus on the donation of vaccines. So we've got these new commitment to us, the UK, and again, several other Japan has also played as typical writing a big fat check to help finance some of it. And Italy and Sweden have also promised, you know, additional 100 million doses and the like. So, I don't know, it is certainly encouraging that we're moving in that way. Interestingly, China is not up there making massive commitments and yet as you know that mean they're the ones that have very deep ties, especially in Africa, especially in parts of South America where there are leading investors so they have a vested interest in that if they want those resources that infrastructure development that they've been, you know, developing, they have an interest in seeing these populations overcome the virus to I'm curious to see that they have not taken a lead and you know, massive donation but let me add this they have been, they have been doing a lot of trials, and including in Latin America of some of their vaccines so they are working in these places. Definitely. One thing, one thing it strikes me is that, you know, I think we can agree that in Africa and South America, the Chinese have developed an advantage over us because they have these. They have the foot in the door. Yeah, they have the foot in the door they have built projects going on, they're lending a lot of money and granting a lot of money they're sending engineers and managers down there. And this is very valuable to them, but let me say that we're still in a competition with them there. And we can we can tend to get our foot back in the door by by doing the Biden initiative and delivering this kind of special healthcare these vaccinations to those countries all of a sudden, you know, I think we have the possibility of equalizing the playing field in countries where right now, today if you look at it, China is ahead of us what do you think about that possibility. It is there absolutely so again it's a window of opportunity the US is Scott in front of it now. And I go back to this again at the end of the day the countries themselves. They are playing off this game there, they're going to go with whatever is delivered if the US shows up with 50,000 or 100 whatever it is, the Chinese show up. That's what matters they dare you know for the political leaders their ability to deliver the goods is first and foremost. And again with Mexico interesting because the US has donated some but only lately instead, you have a lot of the European the apreseneca and you have the Chinese. They have several vaccines that they've been and the Russian, they are in Mexico in a curious way that the US has been from missing the boat. But that is there's a dynamic that's changing now. We'll see how this plays out but I want to say that at the end of the day public health ministers and political leaders, they want the goods and you know where they come from is almost secondary. So this is going to accelerate you as you said we're in a different time now we had COVID vaccination nationalism globalism, and that means that not only will the US deliver what it can I hope it's soon for our own benefit, but it's going to encourage incentivize others to do the same. So what we will have is a whole bunch of countries, delivering vaccines to developing world countries. This is this is all good and so he gets points for that, even just to, you know, make the commitment he gets points. But let me let me go to another part of this and that is, we know that because of the soft power and this, you know, extension of the of the commitment. We know that's good for American, you know, the American image and leadership in the world we know that. And of course he's got to follow through and play that out but I think it's already established that we're back, we're back. And the other the other thing though is what does this mean in terms of American politics call it the reverberating effect. What does it mean that you know the papers are filled with his, you know decency and serving this making this gift to the third world. Does it mean that people who maybe weren't so excited about him get more excited. Does it mean that more Democrats will like him does it mean that some Republicans will like him does it mean that he might be able to change the country in 2022 or 2024. Does it mean that the recalcitrant in in Congress the Republican senators for example, will will take a piece out of that page and compare him to Trump who was, you know, not the same kind of individual. Well, boy, all those are, you know, very difficult to nail down we've got such a polarized environment and even this issue of vaccinations, it used to be a divisive one, you know, separating, you know, the anti backers and those that maybe continue to believe you know, I guess and so you know, big lie of the past election so I would go back to I think we continue to have a very, you know, different narratives happening let's say, and how much is this going to persuade those that are firmly in one camp or the other I don't know. And at the end of the day to Americans are not always real keen on you know foreign policy and even development aid. We have in surveys you know Americans think that we give away you know 10% of our gross national product. In the end we give a pretty small amount even though it's substantial up to some countries a lot, but our overall you know impact in terms of you know our let's say even these vaccines there, they are substantial but they're, you know they're really a fraction of what we have bought and so gosh I don't know, I'm thinking out loud my first thought is, I don't know that it's going to change a lot of my, but it does reflect again the US as you said it's back it's the American diplomacy is back and we're doing what traditionally we have done, and what we have done in the past as leaders, trying to do it again, and yet, who knows these past years is probably going to be a healthy dose of skepticism in some places. My first takeaway again from the, the meetings these past week and in Europe, overall the Europeans early are pleased to see the US back and engage. And, you know this rollout of this vaccine the donations us and others are making is an important necessary step to continue, you know, global cooperation on this pandemic. I think the real risk is that we get to relax at home we think it's over everybody else in the same boat well guess what they're not and it's going to be some time before other places can reach up. Let's say, a level of, I don't know what I call the outset this post pandemic world that were kind of in already here but even there it's kind of yes and no. We've traveled and been out of the country and back in I can tell you right now the US is kind of on this period of well many places are thinking it's all behind us now and it's done. And it's not it's going to continue to fester. And until we address the other world. I don't like that term third world because of the other world, you know, and that that means everything. South America, you know, Africa, many parts of Asia, even parts of Europe, you know, less developed parts that are perhaps not as far along as other areas. This is going to be a continual process. I mean, yeah, it won't be a quick, quick fix. I assume that over time, it does work. Okay, and I'm, I'm focusing in my mind on on Uganda for now. We had a show last week with a, a, an idealist if you will, who is involved in an organization out of Hawaii, actually called project expedite justice, try to deal with atrocities and violations of human rights in Uganda, but there are other countries in Africa that are in the same ballpark, Sudan, Congo, and years past for one that sort of thing. And there's a lot of, there's a lot of problems to be solved. These countries, faced with climate change, the face with not only COVID but other diseases they're faced with economic failure, political failure. It's a tragedy. You've failed countries. They are. Yeah, you know, and I suppose to a lesser extent you find that in South America, but let's, let's focus on Uganda just for a moment. It seems to me, and they're conflicted about accepting handouts from Europe from the US, they conflicted about allowing officials in to, you know, interface with their government, who may or may not be completely democratic. And so they're, they're, you know, they got a lot of risks and challenges to get back to some kind of normalcy here, like COVID and many other things. So my question to you is, so I'm Joe Biden and I walk into Uganda, and I deliver lots of doses, and I vaccinate the public, even when they really haven't been vaccinated and I save a lot of lives. And I show him the, you know, the charitable nature of the American foreign policy, and I help. And I help in a kind of altruistic way with without expecting anything in return and so forth. What does this mean for a place like Uganda? Is this going to help Uganda get on its feet? Is this going to help people in Uganda think differently about not only, you know, the US support, but their own prospects going forward, their own ability to create a better government, a better economy, a better society? Does it, is it going to have a shot? I hate to use this term, a shot in the arm effect on them? Yeah, boy, that's, you know, it's not easy to answer. It really depends, because I mean, you choose a country like Uganda, and this is a place that like so many in Sub-Saharan Africa, they are fighting a sharp rise in cases. They're seeing an array of different variants. And we're talking about public health, in many cases, public health systems that are relatively weak under-served and, well, just lots of capacity issues. And the other dynamic, and this is specifically in Uganda and some of these other neighboring countries, the real people affected are in their 20s and 30s. It's hitting, you know, the working populations that adds a lot of, you know, difficulty to it. You know, and we're seeing in places like Kampala, Uganda, the intensive care units themselves are now almost full. Again, the story repeating itself. Now, having said all that, but of course, help is good and it will help. But is it going to turn it around? It's hard to say. There's a lot of political dynamics going on. I think we're just going to see a lot of unevenness, just as we've seen throughout this pandemic. There are some places more effective than others. Some success stories here and there. Let's hope that from this whole experience we're going to see and be able to step back and draw lessons on what needs to be done. How do you handle those countries that have the weakest capacity? And, you know, I'm not the scientist understanding that, but there's obviously certain strategies that are going to work better in certain places. And what is the role of the international community? You know, can it come in and actually help? Or as a lot of these places, you know, they're frustrated decades and decades of, you know, development assistance. All too often it's just like lands in their lap, but they're not given, let's say, I don't know, the proper power authority or even to develop their own capacity. You know, the famous story of, you know, do we just bring them goods or do we teach them how to, you know, take care of things better on their own? There's certainly a role for the international community in all of these poorest countries because we have the resources, we have the goods, we have the vaccines. They're not going to come out of these places. So, gosh, it's going to be uneven, unfortunately. And that's the reality we're going to continue to see. Let me ask you a follow up question about the follow up. Okay, let's say we deliver to Uganda or any number of other countries in Africa, you know, who are in trouble. And is there's an end there? It seems to me that this kind of diplomacy, this kind of global leadership, regardless of what the Trump base may think about here in the United States, at least initially. It's the right thing to do. It's the right thing for a lot of people in this country who will admire Joe Biden and who will rise to the moral occasion of it. If he follows through and I'm thinking, I know this is a long shot, I'm thinking of a kind of follow up with this. It's not just dropping vaccines all over. It's just following up. It's, you know, if you were the Chinese, you'd follow up, build a dam or a harbor. But if you're Americans, you would send in a kind of updated Peace Corps, wouldn't you? You would send in young people who are interested in seeing the world, having an adventure, learning about places. I think there's a whole generation of American kids who would be up for that. But do you think that could be done? Do you think the result would be positive? Well, again, we have a long history of, as you mentioned, Peace Corps and other development programs that have taken, you know, both not just money but personnel. Right now, it's fair to say that the U.S. has scaled back so much of that that there's no easy quick fix and turnaround. And then in many of these countries, we have been missing in action for quite some time, Africa and Latin America, particularly, and in such a way that China has built that void, as you've noted already, a lot of infrastructure development, a lot of, you know, foreign investment, particularly in places that have natural resources. The mines in Bolivia are Peru. The Chinese are there. So on one hand, the U.S. has a challenge that we've been missing, but we do need to be there. And that's not going to be overnight. I mean, diplomacy has to be built and, you know, we saw pretty severe hitting of American diplomacy in these past years. You can't just rebuild it overnight. So I think, you know, down the road, we might see that how easy is it going to be for the U.S. to be re-engaged in Africa, re-engaged in Latin America. I think it's going to be tough. And in the end, we have to pick and choose. You know, maybe right now the focus will be on the Central American Paces, because that's the hot issue of the day, you know, dealing with migration, dealing with, you know, the border control. But meanwhile, the Chinese are very much continuing a stronger presence and role in places that used to be the U.S., you know, area of influence. So no, again, while yes, there's some positive move and the U.S. is reaching out with this new initiative, but it remains to be seen if it's going to be enduring, if it's going to be with results right away. So are you going to change the image of the U.S.? Well, again, these are things that we do measure. The Pew Research Center regularly gives us, you know, views on the image of the U.S. in the world, and they have improved, no doubt. Not just among the elites, but even the population at large. And so overall, I think it's a positive, but it's going to take time to see the outcome. You know, it's sort of like the Chinese have taught us that you have to look at both sides of the equation all the time. Internally, you know, your economy, your way, your country is being run internally. And also your place in the world, in terms of business and everything else geopolitical. And it seems to me that Trump abandoned that notion. And in just sort of his nationalism, he abandoned the second part of the equation. But if you believe, and I think you and I both do that, you know, you need both, you need both to be to be the United States, you need both to be a world leader, you need both to have the reserve currency and the training advantages and so forth. So then, then you have to learn, although I think we forgot it, you have to learn to walk and chew gum at the same time. You think we can do that. Well, again, yes, on some level, and that's the nature of our world, we've got like, you know, five or six test games going on at the same time and you see it even in the recent diplomacy dealing with Russia dealing with China. There are going to be disagreements and issues that are going to just not be resolved. You have to accept that and that's the nature of international negotiation, you know, agree on the things you can the ones you can't maybe you agree to disagree but you still work on other things and you know, here this vaccine program presents an opportunity for the world community, the world leaders to somehow put aside some of those intractable differences and say look, let's agree on a few things we it's in our best of interest to see this pandemic get solved, you know, and who, and we have to work with it together. The Chinese have a role, they've got vaccines and they've got infrastructure in place. So they do have a role there to play the Russians in their own way as well. In a way where let's all get at the table rather than doing our own individual thing. The G seven right now is this most recent example of a multilateral form that has to continue and it does and it goes on in different forms. So, yeah, I mean I think we're moving more in that way we're back to the some way the same old boring diplomacy which doesn't always have results and always be measured. But look, it's better to be talking and having collaboration because the absence of that is not it's worse. So, I'm hopeful that things are going to be better now, and that hopefully we can draw back lessons learned for futures because the pandemic will they'll be back they're not going to be gone forever. Yes, and decency doesn't stop at the border. Not ideally anyway. Thank you Carlos Carlos war is East West Center. Wonderful to talk to you welcome back well welcome home.