ABSTRACT

As a result of the unexpectedly quick development of vaccines to prevent COVID-19, the Canadian government was pulled in two opposite directions. On the one hand, Canadians exerted extreme pressure on the government to purchase and roll out vaccines as fast as possible for domestic immunization. On the other hand, it sought to promote global access to the vaccine, which would save more lives. This article examines how the Canadian government responded to this quandary, why it made those choices, to what effect and what a better approach would have been. I argue that, by adopting a resolute “Canada First” approach for electoral reasons, while also rhetorically espousing equitable global access, the government tried to satisfy both sides. However, by focusing overwhelmingly “doing good” for Canadians, the government is also indirectly “doing harm” to vulnerable people abroad and prolonging the pandemic globally and for Canadians too. Canadian “vaccine nationalism” is also harmful to Canadian economic interests and claims of global leadership, and will reduce Canada’s “soft power”. The solution, from both an ethical and a pragmatic standpoint, would be to share vaccines more equitably and support intellectual property waivers and other measures to accelerate global vaccine production and immunization.

摘要

由于预防 COVID-19 的疫苗出人意料地快速开发，加拿大政府被拉向两个相反的方向。一方面，加拿大人对政府施加了极大压力，要求政府尽快购买和推出疫苗，以进行国内免疫。另一方面，它试图促进全球获得疫苗，这将挽救更多生命。本文探讨了加拿大政府如何应对这一困境，为什么做出这些选择，效果如何以及会有什么更好的方法。我认为，政府出于选举原因采取坚决的“加拿大优先”方针，同时在口头上支持公平的全球准入，试图让双方都满意。然而，通过以压倒性优势为加拿大人“做好事”，政府还间接地“伤害”了国外的弱势群体，并在全球范围内和加拿大人身上延长了大流行的时间。加拿大的“疫苗民族主义”也损害了加拿大的经济利益和全球领导地位，将削弱加拿大的“软实力”。从道德和务实的角度来看，解决方案将是更公平地共享疫苗，并支持知识产权豁免和其他措施，以加速全球疫苗生产和免疫接种。