Information from Mr. Kiyotaka Akasaka, Presidnet of Foreign Press Center / Japan:公益財団法人フォーリン・プレスセンター(FPCJ) 理事長 赤阪清隆氏

コロナウイルス感染に対する日本の対応ぶり、特に4月7日に発せられた緊急事態宣言などについて、海外の主要メデイアが大きな関心を寄せております。当センターでは、最近の報道ぶりについて、概要を下記の通りまとめて、ホームページに掲載しました。

 ワシントン・ポストなど米国の報道ぶりの中には、日本の対策が遅く、かつ生ぬるくて、東京はニューヨークの二の舞になるという識者の警告を載せた記事も散見されます。緊急事態宣言から2週間たった後の動向次第で、「それ見たことか」ということになるのか、「さすが日本だ」ということになるのか、今まさに正念場という気がいたします。
 この点、特に注目したいのは、ジェフリ・サックス・米コロンビア大教授の下記のブログ記事です。東アジア諸国と欧米諸国のコロナウイルス感染状況と対応ぶりを比較して、東アジア諸国の感染率、死亡率は、欧米諸国と比べて格段に低いという有益なデータを示すとともに、欧米諸国は東アジア諸国からその経験を学べと提唱しています。これから1か月後、はたして日本が他の諸国の良いお手本となれるのかどうか。そうなりたいものです。

主要海外メディアの報道ぶり(4月4日―8日)
 

CNN(米国)(電子版)は、6日付で「世界経済に日本から1兆ドル投入」を掲載。世界第3位経済の日本は国内総生産の2割に当たる総額108兆円規模の緊急経済対策を公表したが、米、仏、独などの主要国は既に巨額の経済対策を打ち出しており、日本は最も遅い発表となったと報道。翌7日付では新型コロナウイルス感染拡大に伴い、日本が緊急事態宣言」を掲載。中国に次いで新型コロナウイルス国内発生が報告された日本は他諸国のような踏みこんだ措置を取るのが遅く、このような対応の遅れに批判があると報じている。

The Wall Street Journal紙(米国)は、6日付で「新型コロナウイルス抑制成功の後で、アジア諸国は制限強化必至」を掲載。厳格な行動制限措置を避けてきたアジア諸国は新たな感染拡大で「自粛」など緩い制限措置による抑制の成功が脅かされ、今や制限を強化している」と報道。翌7日付(Megumi Fujikawa記者他)では「日本は新型コロナウイルス緊急策で世帯と企業へ直接支給を計画」を掲載。安倍総理は「日本経済は戦後最大の危機に瀕している」と述べ、108兆円規模の経済対策を閣議決定したが、経済専門家は、政府は繰り返される感染拡大の波を防止しなければならず、具体策の導入に時間を要すると見ていると報じている。


The Washington Post (米国)は、7日付(Simon Denyer東京支局長)で日本は、経済注視しつつ、都市封鎖なしの緊急事態を選択」を掲載。安倍首相は、新型コロナウルスの影響が最も深刻な東京他6府県に対し1カ月間の緊急事態を宣言したが、専門家は「東京はすぐにニューヨークのような悲惨な状況に直面するかもしれない」と警告していると報じた。

The New York Times紙 (米国)は、7日付(Motoko Rich東京特派員他)で日本は新型コロナウィルス緊急事態を宣言も、遅すぎるか」を掲載。日本はこの数カ月間、他の国のような厳しい措置をとることもなく、感染者数を抑えてきたことで世界を当惑させてきたが、4月7日の時点で感染者数は3,906名と前週の2倍となり、医療専門家は今回の緊急事態宣言は惨事を避けるのに間に合うのか、それとも遅すぎるのか評価が分かれていると報じている。

The Economist 誌(英国)は、4日付で「安倍晋三首相が緊急事態宣言を発動へ」を掲載。日本では新型コロナウイルスの感染者が急増、政府の対応は後手に回っており、欧米の後追いとなる新たな懸念があると報じている。

The Guardian(英国)は、7日付(Justin McCurry東京特派員)で「日本は新型コロナウイルスによる緊急事態を宣言」を掲載。安倍首相は一か月間の緊急事態を宣言し戦後最大の危機を乗り越えるための記録的な経済刺激策を発表したが、日本はより厳格な封鎖導入に消極的と報じた。

Financial Times(英国)は、7日付(Robinh Harding東京支局長)で「日本は新型コロナウイルス制御のため部分的な都市封鎖に賭ける」を掲載。安倍首相の施策は、かなりの数の感染者と大規模検査の未実施にも拘らず、完全な都市封鎖を行わずに新型コロナウイルスを制御できるかどうかの試みとして他の国から注意深く見られるだろうと報じている。

東亜日報(韓国)は、7日付で「緊急事態」宣言の安倍首相、史上最大の経済支援を掲載。都市封鎖はないものの、緊急事態宣言の土台である「新型インフルエンザ等対策特別措置法」を2012年に整備後、初めての発令であり、世界金融危機による経済への打撃を克服するために09年に発表した56兆8千億円の事業規模を上回る史上最大の緊急経済対策を出すと報道。翌8日付(パクヒョンジュン東京特派員)では「安倍首相、緊急事態宣言はしたが…を掲載。地震など自然災害が多い日本で感染症にともなう緊急事態宣言は史上初だが、経済への影響を懸念して緊急事態を先送りし、感染者が急増したので対応に出たと報じている。

朝鮮日報(韓国)は、7日付(イ・ハウォン東京特派員)で「安倍首相 新型コロナ緊急事態宣言…経済対策108兆円」を掲載。事業規模108兆円の経済対策は日本の国内総生産(GDP)の20%程度にあたり、世界金融危機の克服のため2009年に発表した経済対策(56兆円)の2倍近いと報道。

中央日報(韓国)は、6日付で「安倍氏、非常事態宣言の一歩手前…日本の成長率、マイナス5%まで落ち込む」と題するEIUの日本担当アナリストへのインタビュー記事を掲載。昨年10月の消費増税、オリンピック延期の打撃も重なり日本の経済成長率は-5%まで落ち込むとみていると報じた。更に、7日付で「安倍首相、東京などに緊急事態宣言公式発令 国民の行動変えなくては」を掲載。安倍首相は、外出自粛などを通じて行動を変えることが重要、人との接触を70~80%減らしてこそ効果があるとの認識を示しつつ、海外のような「都市封鎖」はしないとして国民を安心させることに注力していると報じた。
://fpcj.jp/worldnews/through/p=80283/

ジェフリー・サックス教授のブログ

The East-West Divide in COVID-19 Control

Jeffrey D. Sachs  |  April 8, 2020   |  Project Syndicate
 
The public health response will be decisive in stopping the COVID-19 coronavirus before it devastates entire populations in the West and around the world. And the right approach requires that the United States and Europe learn what we can from East Asia as rapidly as possible.

NEW YORK – East Asian countries are outperforming the United States and Europe in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the fact that the outbreak began in China, to which the rest of East Asia is very closely bound by trade and travel. The US and Europe should be learning as rapidly as possible about the East Asian approaches, which could still save vast numbers of lives in the West and the rest of the world.

An important starting point for comparison is the number of confirmed cases and COVID-19 deaths per million population, shown in the first column of the accompanying table for April 7. It is as if the two regions are in different worlds. Europe and the US are engulfed in the pandemic: confirmed cases per million range from 814 (UK) to 3,036 (Spain), and deaths per million range from 24 to 300. In the East Asian countries, confirmed cases per million range from three (Vietnam) to 253 (Singapore), and deaths per million from 0 to four.

East Asian countries are not systematically undercounting either cases or deaths relative to their Western counterparts. Both regions have tested a similar proportion of their populations, as shown in the third column of the table.

Importantly, the differences between the two regions do not reflect firmer economic lockdowns in East Asia. Google has recently published fascinating data on the reduction of activity in various sectors of the economy. Google’s results regarding the retail sector are shown in the fourth column of the table. The disruptions to normal life (comparing the end of March with a baseline of January 3 to February 6) are less severe in East Asia.

The disparity between East Asian and Western countries’ public-health and economic outcomes reflects three key differences between the regions. For starters, the East Asian countries were far better prepared for a new disease outbreak. The 2003 SARS outbreak was a wake-up call, and frequent waves of dengue fever in several East Asian countries reinforced the message. In Europe and the US, concerns over SARS, Ebola, Zika, and dengue fever seemed far away, abstract, and (with the exception of SARS) mainly “tropical.” The result of this greater awareness was a much higher national alert level throughout the region when China first publicly reported an unusual clutch of pneumonia cases in Wuhan on December 31, 2019.

In epidemic control, early action is crucial to containment. Starting in early January, most of China’s neighbors began to curtail travel with China and immediately stepped up testing and tracing operations. China and others have deployed new digital technologies for monitoring the spread of the disease.

Western countries were far less attentive to the novel coronavirus when it first appeared. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was in contact with the China CDC on January 3. The first US case was confirmed on January 20. And yet it was not until January 31 that US President Donald Trump announced travel restrictions with China. Even then, these vital restrictions were not taken seriously. Recent estimates suggest that 430,000 people arrived in the US from China after the outbreak was disclosed, including around 40,000 after Trump’s so-called travel ban.

The East Asian public is also more aware of the proper precautions to take. Face masks are widely used and have been at least since SARS. Western authorities, by contrast, told the public not to wear face masks, partly to direct the limited supply of protective masks to health workers, and partly because officials underestimated masks’ benefits for reducing new infections. Similarly, hand sanitizers, greater physical distancing, and less frequent handshaking are all part of East Asians’ daily life.

Lastly, East Asian authorities have dramatically stepped up screening for symptoms as people move about in public areas, offices, and other crowded places. It is routine in many enterprises to screen all workers’ body temperature as they enter the workplace. Temperature monitoring is also used at transit hubs like airports and train stations. This practice is still almost non-existent in the US and Europe.

China’s outbreak was the worst in East Asia, and, in a way, the most instructive for the US and Europe. Unlike its neighbors, China experienced a full-fledged epidemic for several weeks, from around mid-December to mid-January. By the time China quarantined Wuhan on January 23, there were already 375 confirmed cases in Hubei Province, where Wuhan is located, and probably many more unconfirmed cases (either symptomatic but untested cases or asymptomatic). The virus had also begun to spread across China, with an additional 196 confirmed cases.

At that stage, China took drastic action. It clamped down on all travel and movement in public; quickly implemented online systems to track individuals and enforce quarantine orders; and tested extensively and monitored massively for symptoms. The measures were undoubtedly very drastic and were widely criticized. Yet they were also remarkably effective. China brought a full-fledged and rapidly spreading epidemic under control in just a few weeks – a feat many experts thought was impossible.

Many question whether China’s stringent controls can work or be acceptable in the US. Yet the US must learn from China’s success, and from East Asia’s success more generally. As US National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins has cogently put it, “The approach we should be taking right now is one that most people would find to be too drastic because otherwise it is not drastic enough.”

Europe and the US do not yet have the epidemic under control, and shortages of life-saving ventilators and deaths of health workers lacking basic protective gear compound the tragedy. The public health response will be decisive in stopping COVID-19 before it devastates entire populations in the West and around the world. And the right approach in the West requires that we learn what we can from East Asia as rapidly as possible.

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/west-must-learn-covid19-control-from-east-asia-by-jeffrey-d-sachs-2020-04