By Gwamaka Makyusa – Art in Tanzania internship
After lagging behind the United States and the United Kingdom in the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines this spring, the European Union is on track to catch up by July. Following initial missteps, the EU has developed a better strategy for vaccine procurement. Even in times of distress, the bloc has demonstrated solidarity between its larger and smaller economies — limiting the space for Russian and Chinese vaccine diplomacy in Europe — and towards the developing world, which will pay dividends. By learning from its mistakes and capitalising on international solidarity, Europe will be better equipped for future pandemics and increase its global soft power.
Europe fell behind the U.S. and other countries because of its slow negotiation process for procuring vaccine doses. The EU had no prior experience; health was a member state’s competence. The member states’ approval of the European Commission vaccine plan on June 17, 2020 — which set aside the vaccine “alliance” initiated by France and Germany, later joined by Italy and the Netherlands, for a joint procurement led by the EU’s largest economies — stemmed from the idea of avoiding competition over vaccines inside the EU. Yet, this put a significant burden on the unprepared commission, which treated vaccines as a trade matter rather than an emergency negotiation, prioritising lower prices over timely deliveries. Widespread vaccine scepticism was also a problem, and when negotiations were carried out last summer, Europeans thought they essentially had the pandemic under control, so they were not desperate for a vaccine. However, COVID-19’s variants proved them wrong, and ultimately, the EU fell behind in the rollout, particularly in comparison to the speed of the United Kingdom or Israel.
Yet, recent facts suggest that the EU is learning from its mistakes. First, the rollout has significantly improved across the continent. By early May, the daily pace of vaccine injection had increased by 60% in France, 90% in Italy, and 145% in Germany compared to the previous month, matching the pace in the U.K. The EU is now vaccinating more than 3 million people daily, nearly twice as many as the United States (albeit with a larger population). The majority of EU member states now have at least 30% of their population at least partially vaccinated, including the five largest: Germany (38.2%), France (33.3%), Italy (32.8%), Spain (33.3%), and Poland (31.3%). While the overall EU rate of 32.9% still lags behind those of Israel (60.1%), the U.K. (55.4%), and the U.S. (47.9%), infection and death rates are decreasing across the continent, and EU officials expect to catch up with the U.S. by July. While logistics improvements, such as enabling military facilities and family doctors to administer vaccines, were crucial to this performance, the EU appears to have found a solution to its most significant supply-side problem.
After being criticised for a lack of leadership, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen announced negotiations and ultimately concluded a deal for over 1.8 billion doses through 2023 with Pfizer and BioNTech. Such deliveries will be facilitated by a scale-up in production at Pfizer’s manufacturing sites. At the same time, the commission’s diplomatic initiative is likely to set a precedent for a bolder EU role in future health crises. Following the experience of unmet delivery promises with AstraZeneca, there has been substantial pressure from NGOs and debate among EU member states to buy and share ownership of vaccine patents, aiming to disentangle European public health from the fortunes of a handful of private companies. While member states disagree over the U.S. proposal for a broader liberalization of COVID-19 vaccine patents — with Germany fearing a negative impact on intellectual property, while Italy and France support Washington — the EU holds a strong position at the negotiating table given its massive efforts in vaccine production and regulatory power, and therefore has an important role to play in worldwide response to future pandemics or similar crises. The European Council is currently assessing a temporary suspension of vaccine patents.
Given the slowness of the EU’s vaccine rollout, the advantages of shared European procurement initially seemed slim. However, from a geopolitical standpoint, there were significant benefits to an EU-led approach. If Brussels had not taken centralised action, it is fair to assume that larger European countries would have cooperated to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies from a stronger position. They would then distribute vaccine doses to others after meeting their domestic needs, similar to the United States. However, assuming that smaller European countries would have been patiently waiting would be wrong. So far, Hungary is the only EU member state using the Russian vaccine Sputnik V. However, disputes over the purchase or distribution of Sputnik V have led to government reshuffles in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Hungary also turned to the Chinese vaccine Sinopharm for additional doses, and Poland considered it. While the case of Hungary is not surprising, interest from other countries indicates that the absence of shared procurement may have led member states to turn to and rely on China and Russia for jabs, offering Beijing and Moscow an opportunity for more significant influence in the EU.
Lastly, the EU has demonstrated its solidarity even in times of hardship, which will pay off in the future. Set aside the one case of blocking the export of the AstraZeneca vaccine to Australia, as the company had not fulfilled its commitment to the EU. Since December 2020, the EU has exported more than 159 million doses to 87 countries and supported the global vaccine initiative COVAX with € 2.2 billion. The United States, on the other hand, only began to unlock 60 million doses of unused AstraZeneca vaccines in April, following the rapid deterioration of the situation in India. It is true that the EU also pushed AstraZeneca to supply the EU market first, but this did not result in an export ban; instead, the EU used these doses to assist the developing world. Perhaps these EU efforts are too little, too late, given the significant impact of the delays on both lives and economies across Europe. Maybe they will never be acknowledged by EU citizens, who are also unhappy with their national governments’ management of the vaccine rollout. However, it is still remarkable how the EU adapted to an area that had been a national responsibility. Improving its capabilities by learning from past mistakes and investing in solidarity will position Europe well to tackle these challenges more effectively in the future, both domestically and globally.
