China’s ulterior motives disguised as ‘offerings’ of medical resources and protective equipment only to be forcibly recalled due to manufacturing faults and errors.

As the global fight against the coronavirus pandemic continues and the UK enters its third week of nation-wide lockdown, indications of severe strains on the economy and surmounting pressures in society are beginning to show. However, a few countries around the world seem to be faring rather well. A noticeable case of changing narratives, transforming its national image from a ‘victim’ to a ‘survivor’ is that of China. This is an analysis of China and how it has acquired its leading role in the global fight against the pandemic.

Arguably questionable in intentions, countries have been rejecting Chinese-made equipment due to discovered faults in testing-kits and failures of meeting basic safety requirements. Governments in Spain, Turkey, Czech Republic, and the Netherlands are few amongst many of the countries that have purchased medical equipment and resources from China and were later forced to recall much of the shipment after discovering that they were inaccurate or did not work as intended. This sentiment was shared by medical professionals in Spain when imported testing-kits proved inconsistent in detecting positive cases. It was further discovered that these tests had only 30% sensitivity, meaning it identified people with the virus accurately only 30% of the time. This was later addressed by the Chinese embassy in Spain that the company behind the kits did not have an official license from Chinese medical authorities to sell its products. It was further clarified and promised that the equipment donated by the Chinese government would not show similar faults.

Whilst repeated clarifications have helped distinguish between medical equipment purchased from private Chinese companies from that distributed by the Chinese government, countries remain doubtful at China’s intentions, calling it ‘politics of generosity’. When coupled with its alleged intervention in WHO’s exclusion of Taiwan’s membership as well as being under fire for lack of transparency and attempted ‘cover-up’ of the true-scale of the pandemic; the success of China achieving her ‘ulterior motives’ becomes questionable.

France. The first masks ordered from China were reported arriving in France on 31st March. A total of nearly 13.5 million masks were recorded airlifted from China to France between late March and early April. These masks were immediately allocated to front-line medical workers, 80% of these masks were the FFP2 type (N95 respirator masks offering high levels of protection against the virus) and no reports of fault or malfunction were noted. Later, in an article published in The Jakarta Post spoke of an alleged attempt by France’s Chinese community in mobilising a community-based response to help the fight against the virus. This included reports of students handing out Chinese embassy-sponsored ‘COVID kits’ in the Paris suburbs, contents which included FFP2 masks, protective gloves, disinfectant wipes and Chinese traditional medicine. Whilst the purpose of this program of ‘COVID kits’ being predominantly backed by the Chinese government in attempts at helping Chinese nationals abroad who are unable to return home to China, it was met with suspicion from the French government and many were arrested as a result. It remains difficult to judge the short-term impacts and consequences of the actions from both actors but what is clear, however, is that this practice of ‘Chinese health diplomacy’ has done more than just provide aid; but has further strained diplomatic relations between countries as a result.

Media outlets like the Business Insider have even gone to lengths in calling the Chinese intentions as having been motivated to ‘win points on the world stage’ as it ‘prefers to be seen fighting the virus around the world to suffering criticism of its role as the country where the disease began.’ In an attempt to revise its role in this fight against the global pandemic, a recent attempt made by the Chinese government to completely rewrite its narrative was exposed in an alleged attempt to force foreign government officials to ‘praise’ China over coronavirus outbreak and ‘portray the People’s Republic as a reliable partner and prudent crisis manager’.

In one case, the president of the Wisconsin State had allegedly received this drafted resolution in an email from a diplomat from the Chinese Consulate in Chicago asking that he openly gave his support to China in its efforts to stop the spread of the coronavirus; praising the Chinese government for its practices of ‘transparency’ and ‘unprecedented and rigorous measures’ in the pandemic. A similar case was reported by Germany’s Die Welt newspaper, which mentioned that German officials were invited ‘to speak in positive terms about China’s management of the coronavirus’ as part of the pursuance of ‘an intensified information and propaganda policy with regard to the coronavirus.' Whilst the legitimacy of both allegations remains undefined, it remains true of the concerns over China’s participation in the pandemic and especially in that of their active distribution of ‘Made In China’ testing kits and masks.

In another corner of the world, there seems to be another country which is pursuing its ‘masks diplomacy’ with similar vigor; Taiwan. Currently the second largest producer of masks worldwide, Taiwan takes a leading role in the fight against the coronavirus pandemic by offering its assistance to countries through donations of medical equipment, sharing experiences and funding key medical research. (Head over to the article #TaiwanCanHelp#TaiwanIsHelping by Angela Zhou to read more about how Taiwan’s efforts at distributing medical equipment and resources have been changing their position in the world and the complications the country has faced as a result of their actions)

In terms of its aims as a propaganda drive, it would be untrue to deem China’s ‘mask diplomacy’ as a failure as evidence from countries like Serbia, Hungary and Cambodia suggest otherwise. Whilst the Serbian president Aleksander Vucic was seen to kiss the Chinese flag when medical equipment arrived and posters with words ‘thanks, brother Xi’ put up on billboards across Belgrade, in Hungary, officials have repeatedly thanked China for its contribution and simultaneously downplayed assistance received from the European Union; complementary to Vucic’s commentary that ‘European solidarity does not exist. Only China can help.’ Similarly in Cambodia, whilst foreigners are banned from entry into the country, privileges are given to Chinese troops as they continue to enter the country for military exercises. However, in light of the nations’ long-standing roles as allies and key members of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the validity of its claims of success can be called into question.

Ultimately, how successful is China’s mask diplomacy?

Evidence of Western suspicions over its intentions and motives, donning the actions as part of an ‘aggressive PR campaign’, does nothing except for raising doubts and increasing strains on diplomatic ties across the Pacific; the height of which was exhibited in Trump’s suspension of America’s funding to WHO on 14th April as a response to China’s alleged purposeful stalling of time and concealment of crucial data on the spread of the coronavirus.

In the UK, concerns have been voiced in the British intelligence community over the UK’s relationship with China due to beliefs that China will ‘become more assertive in defending its one-party model’ and may require the UK government to restrict takeovers of key companies in high-tech areas’ and ‘reduce Chinese students’ access to research at universities and elsewhere.’ In light of the ongoing complications over Huawei and 5G technology, worries such as that ‘we...have failed to take a strategic view of Britain’s long-term economic, technical and security needs’ were expressed by a group of MPs when evaluating UK-China relations under past predecessors.

The governments of Japan and India share similar sentiments as they rush to recall their respective industries from China with the aims of reducing their dependence on the Chinese market. As governments around the world begin to review their relations with China, predetermined alliances also fall victim to this new surge in skepticism over the Chinese government and its actions. When three high-ranking officials from the Islamic Republic of Iran have each in turn described the numbers of coronavirus cases and deaths in China as a ‘bitter joke,' deeming them as ‘not trustworthy,' even China’s relationship as one of the country’s few allies was insufficient in gaining Iran’s support in China’s controversy over alleged intentional concealment of the initial outbreak.

As we progress deeper into the political turmoil exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic, we ought to remind ourselves of a fundamental human virtue - honesty. In a climate where Big Data dominates and our lives have now been moved indoors, characterised by reduced human contact and increased digital interconnectivity, it is crucial for us to remain heavily critical of the information we receive and analyse everything with a grain of salt. Is China’s ‘mask diplomacy’ a practice of foreign diplomacy with underlying ‘ulterior motives’, or only a show of their alliance and support during these challenging times of abnormality and uncertainty?

Disclaimer: the article above was written in advance of the day it was published - we apologise for any new developments and changes to the information and data published since.

Note that opinions expressed in the article above do not represent the overall stance of Asiatic Affairs, Students' Union UCL or University College London. If you have read something you would like to respond to, please get in touch with uclasiaticaffairs@gmail.com.