Once again, Donald Trump falls below even the low standards the world has come to expect of him. His decision to cut the World Health Organization off at the knees as a deadly pandemic sweeps the globe borders on the criminal.

Trump accuses the WHO of mismanaging the coronavirus outbreak, failing to warn the world, and channelling misinformation from the Chinese government. For this he has “suspended” U.S. funding to the organization, a transparent attempt to dodge responsibility for his own administration’s record of failure on COVID-19.

As bad as the pandemic is in Europe, the United States and Canada, it has yet to strike parts of the world least equipped to deal with it. When that happens, as it surely will, they will turn to the WHO for vital information and such basic equipment as masks and gowns.

From a public health point of view, it’s hard to imagine a worse time to cripple the organization. But this is clearly not about health; it’s of a piece with Trump’s well-established tendency to lash out at others (Democrats, the media, foreigners) rather than take responsibility for his own shortcomings.

He accuses the WHO of being too chummy with Beijing, but conveniently overlooks the fact that he himself was tweeting praise of China in January for its handling of the pandemic and boasting that “we have it under control.” There’s now plenty of evidence that China covered up vital information about the spread of the disease, but blaming the WHO for that is pretty much beside the point.

Still, just because Trump goes after an organization shouldn’t mean all sensible people should rush to its defence and place it above criticism. The WHO has indeed made its share of mistakes, largely because of its very nature.

As a United Nations agency it depends on its member states for information and cooperation. It has no power to compel its members to produce information they don’t want to provide, nor can it order them to do anything. It can only give advice and make recommendations. But like the UN itself, with all its flaws, if the WHO didn’t exist, the world would have to invent something very much like it.

It’s important, then, to recognize both the key role the WHO can play and the limitations it works under. It gathers what information it can, but relies on governments that may not want or be able to produce accurate data.

In that regard, any country weighing how best to handle a health crisis like COVID-19 should factor all that into the information and advice it gets from the WHO. It shouldn’t treat it like gospel.

That’s true in Canada as much as anywhere else. And in recent days our politicians and public health officials have come under fire for following guidance from the WHO that turned out not to be the best.

Most notably, the Trudeau government resisted bringing in travel restrictions, even from China, until mid-March. As recently as March 13, Health Minister Patty Hajdu argued against closing borders, citing WHO guidance that “border measures are highly ineffective.” Dr. Theresa Tam, the chief public health officer, argued the same position for weeks.

Three days later, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau reversed course and closed Canada’s borders to almost everyone. It was the right decision, but who knows how much more effective it would have been if taken earlier?

Conditions change, and wise officials will adapt to the new circumstances. But citing WHO guidance as if it was unquestionable dogma, and then suddenly throwing it overboard, makes thoughtful people wonder what else isn’t quite adding up. The feeling is all the more pressing when we’re being asked to turn our lives inside-out on the basis of “expert” advice.

Politicians can easily aggravate such a situation.

Some — like Trump — are shameless about scapegoating the WHO or even their own medical advisers to cover up their own mistakes.

Others take a more subtle approach. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney, for one, this week called out Tam for advising against border restrictions early on in the crisis, a legitimate criticism. But he went a big step too far by accusing her of parroting talking points from the Chinese government. That comes close to questioning her patriotism, not just her professional judgment.

On the other side, some politicians in effect try to use public health officials as a way to immunize themselves against criticism. From Justin Trudeau to Doug Ford, they argue they’re just following expert medical advice when they close non-essential businesses or order people to stay at home.

But public health officials aren’t the ones making those decisions. Their job, by definition, is to focus on public health and all they’re expected to do is offer their best advice in that area.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

It’s up to the politicians to weigh up the whole picture — public health, the economy, and what they think the public will accept at a given moment. Then they, not their officials, must decide on the best course of action, and take responsibility for it.

In a democratic society we shouldn’t be asked to suspend our critical faculties, even during an emergency. Legitimate questions and criticism are as important as ever.

But it’s also important to pick the right targets and go after them in the right way. And right now, that means the politicians whose job it is to get us through the crisis.

Read more about: