Thesis
The paper by Agartan et al. (2020) seeks to study the perceptions of the Covid-19 threat in relation to a change in the dynamics of international relationships. According to the authors, with the increase in the levels of political tensions in the international arena, the criticism of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) attempts at regulating the issue and studying the nature of the problem have increased.
However, Agartan et al. (2020) assert that the specified outcome signifies the changes in multilateralism rather than the alterations in the perception of WHO itself.
The main arguments that the authors present to support their statement include the current trends in the global GSP perspective, as well as the major changes occurring within the global political environment. These include the increasing tension between China and the U.S., as well as China and Europe, and the resulting shift in the role that the WHO plays in assessing the phenomenon of the coronavirus (Agartan et al., 2020). Moreover, the authors cite the studies that emphasize the global leadership role that WHO is presently playing.
In turn, the authors offer several ideas that could be perceived as debatable by some readers. For example, the choice to frame the problem under analysis as that one of duality could cause certain misunderstandings. Namely, the perceptions of Covid-19 and the WHO as the organization that is currently seeking to address the global crisis are largely defined by cultural and social factors. Specifically, the level of the target population’s education and awareness, as well as their perception of reality, define their attitudes toward the WHO and its actions.
Main arguments
The arguments that Agartan et al. (2020) offer include the available information about the recent actions of the U.S. administration and the Chinese government. Similarly, consideration regarding the criticism of WHO, which has been circulating in the media recently, is considered. Mainly, the studies addressing the subject at hand were consulted in Agartan et al.’s (2020) paper, although other pieces of evidence are also present.; Specifically, the reports concerning the actions of the U.S. and Chinese state administrations are referred to in the article when considering the main factors affecting the shift in the perception of WHO and its work. Furthermore, the role of the Forum, which represents the collaboration of multiple scholars and sees to address some of the current global issues, including the coronavirus, is represented as the source of critical evidence (Agartan et al., 2020). The specified perspective allows embracing the problem in its entirety and develops a clear grasp on the subject at hand.
Debatable issues
However, some of the conclusions that Agartan et al. (2020)make are quite contentious. For instance, the authors of the article emphasize the need to frame the argument from the perspective of dualism. Namely, Agartan et al. (2020) posit that the tension observed in relation to WHO should be considered solely as either a reproach toward it or the unquestionable acknowledgement of WHO’s authority. Instead, a more critical and impartial attitude seems to be legitimate.
|