In this webinar, Mr Lucio Pitlo examines the appeal of China’s vaccine diplomacy in the Philippines, the gains obtained by both sides, concerns, and the challenges to Beijing’s vaccine outreach to its neighbouring country. Dr Paul Busbarat discussed the complexity of China’s vaccine diplomacy in Thailand.
REGIONAL SOCIAL AND CULTURAL STUDIES PROGRAMME WEBINAR
Thursday, 16 December 2021 – This webinar was the third and final part of the series on China’s Vaccine Diplomacy in Southeast Asia. Mr Lucio Pitlo III (Research Fellow, Asia-Pacific Pathways to Progress Foundation, The Philippines) examined the appeal of China’s vaccine diplomacy in the Philippines, the gains obtained by both sides, concerns, and the challenges to Beijing’s vaccine outreach to its neighbouring country. Dr Pongphisoot (Paul) Busbarat discussed the complexity of China’s vaccine diplomacy in Thailand. This webinar was moderated by Mr Dien Nguyen An Luong (Visiting Fellow, ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute), and supported by Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS).
First, Mr Pitlo talked about the appeal of the Chinese vaccine in The Philippines. He suggested that timing was an important factor as China was the first to donate and sell vaccines when the Philippines was in need. China was able to provide a steady and dependable supply of vaccines compared to others and that China did not demand advance payments. Furthermore, Chinese vaccines required less stringent logistical requirements. For instance, western vaccines like Pfizer require refrigeration which poses challenges to countries like the Philippines with unsuitable climates and resources.
Mr Pitlo further argued that there were gains for both countries through this vaccine diplomacy. The Philippines gained from early access to scarce doses and it was able to inoculate frontliners quickly. China’s success could have compelled competitors to step up their vaccine strategies with the Philippines. For China, the Philippines’ usage of its vaccine was a vote of confidence for those doubting its’ vaccine quality. and it built goodwill and diplomatic relations between the two countries.
However, Mr Pitlo also raised concerns about the efficacy of Chinese vaccines and opaqueness about the cost and how purchases were negotiated. He also said that Chinese vaccine donations were small compared to the substantial supply orders they got from the Philippine government. There were also worries about the country becoming too dependent on Chinese vaccines and that China may capitalize on the situation to make advances in the West Philippine Sea to the detriment of the country’s security and maritime resource rights. Lastly, the United States, Japan, and other European countries challenged China’s vaccine diplomacy despite being the first key donor to the Philippines.
Next, Dr Busbarat presented about China’s vaccine diplomacy in Thailand. He suggested that in 2020, China gained a reputation for handling the outbreak at home and assisting other countries in overcoming the health crisis. As a result, Thailand benefited from China’s outreach, especially its vaccine diplomacy in 2021. Consequently, the Thai government adopted the Chinese vaccine as the first choice for its national vaccination plan in 2021. However, China’s vaccine diplomacy in Thailand has been complicated by three factors.
Dr Busbarat stated that the first factor stems from the United States, as the country based on its domestic recovery and active vaccine diplomacy upon the arrival of the Biden administration; thus, it is a direct competitor to China in vaccine diplomacy. Second, China’s assertive attempts to protect its vaccines’ reputations in Thailand have also raised questions regarding Beijing’s intention amongst the Thai public. Thus, there has been domestic pressure and suspicion about the Thai government’s support of and overdependence on Chinese vaccines, despite their low efficacy. Lastly, Chinese vaccines reputation has been affected due to the recurrence of the outbreak after the Thai New Year holiday. Therefore, Dr Busbarat argued that China’s success in its vaccine diplomacy in the early period is not guaranteed despite the cordial ties between the Thai and Chinese governments. Later, Western vaccines have also come into Thailand on a large scale to challenge Chinese vaccines. Thus, China attempts to assert its role against these challenges by continuing to donate/sell its vaccines and maintaining close relations with key Thai agencies.
The webinar ended with a robust Question and Answer segment. The audience raised important questions such as the Filipino sentiment about Chinese vaccine donations being greater than US vaccine donations, the efficacy of Chinese vaccines within China itself compared to its effectiveness in Southeast Asia and if Chinese vaccine manufacturers should promote their vaccines independent of the government to boost its reputation. Others also enquired about how we could assess the overall effectiveness of China’s vaccine diplomacy in the ASEAN region. The webinar drew over 70 participants.
