Worldwide, the virus is still spreading, but the vaccines are advancing. Logistical planning for vaccine manufacture and distribution is also now quite advanced, in Russia, China, America, and elsewhere.
There also remains the question of whether the near-universal lockdowns were an overreaction, and if so, what should have replaced them. The panic at the start of 2020 was so great because the 2003 SARS coronavirus was highly lethal, killing about 10% of those who caught it. But Covid-19 seems to kill about 1%, and while we're still learning who the most vulnerable are, it seems to be people already weakened by old age or by conditions like diabetes, hypertension, and obesity.
So far, Sweden has been the leading example of a country which didn't have a full lockdown. But in the longer run, India may be the biggest test case for herd immunity against coronavirus. Like most big countries, India is testing a number of vaccines, some made in India, others foreign. And as a major manufacturer of medical goods, it may become a supplier of vaccines to many developing countries. But an advisory task force recently said India should not base its national strategy on vaccination or on lockdowns - since vaccines will not soon be available in sufficient quantity, and lockdowns interfere too much with basic economic survival - and that the focus should be, not on preventing the spread, but rather on protecting and saving the vulnerable.
One may also ask about the cultural impact of the lockdowns. In China, the culture and political system already allow a high degree of centralized surveillance and mass mobilization, so the national response to the emergency was perhaps not so shocking. In America, one can see that in general, liberals are in favor of locking down, conservatives are in favor of opening up. An essayist at "Brown Pundits" remarks that western liberalism was founded on values of freedom and equality, but has become less free as the importance of equality was elevated over freedom. In American liberalism, especially in its progressive neoliberal form, freedom is now mostly about economics and lifestyle, but there is enthusiasm for new moralities justified by science or social justice. The struggle over lockdowns has become part of the struggle over whether America will become a liberal version of Russia's conservative "managed democracy".
Meanwhile, life goes on:
In mid-September, Japan's ruling party will decide a successor to Shinzo Abe, scion of an old political family and the longest-serving prime minister in modern times, who reluctantly resigned for health reasons. The party favors his chief of staff, the public favors his rival, the former defense minister. Abe never got to change Article 9, the pacifist clause in Japan's constitution, but the country will likely maintain its strategic direction, attending meetings of the anti-China "Quadrilateral" (US, Japan, Australia, India) in the coming months.
In India, a year after Kashmir's status was normalized, and centuries after the Mughal empire built a mosque on the alleged birthplace of Lord Rama, the foundation of a new temple to Rama was laid, in a ceremony of religious and national significance. Hindu nationalism and the revival of Hindu identity is now so strong that even the traditionally secular Congress party is now accused of "soft Hindutva".
China is still advancing and vibrant - in the sedentary age of lockdowns, e-commerce giant Alibaba has been even more prosperous there, like Bezos's Amazon in America - but it's challenged on many fronts. A key consideration is access to computer chips. The world's leading chip manufacturer, TSMC, is in Taiwan, with fabrication plants in both America and China. A subtle struggle has been unfolding at least since the end of 2018.
A new great-power region of vulnerability appeared. India has Kashmir, China has Xinjiang and Hong Kong, America has its anti-racist uprising and its porous southern border, Russia has its Ukraine vulnerability - and now steadfast ally Belarus has a mass movement calling for new elections. It seems that someone in Russia's ruling circles panicked and had Navalny, the leading anti-system politician in Russia (where the system consists of Putin's United Russia, and several other parties, like the Communists and Zhirinovsky's LDPR), poisoned before he could organize something similar, during this September's regional elections.
The main port of Lebanon was destroyed by the explosion of a warehouse full of chemicals that had been confiscated from a ship six years before. In public, people treated this as a symptom of corruption and incompetence, strengthening calls to get rid of the country's dynastic political elites. Beneath the surface, the world asked if this was a secret Hezbollah bomb depot or an act of Israeli sabotage. It is reasonable to think that it was both - that Hezbollah kept the cargo in order to make bombs, and that Israel knew and blew it up, as part of a broader ongoing campaign against the Iranian-led 'axis of resistance'. At a still higher level, one could ask if Iran's ally Russia approved the deniable cargo delivery in the first place, and if America approved the port sabotage as a blow against the Eurasian trade network that China and Russia are building.
Within the anti-Iranian axis of Israel and the Saudi-led Gulf Arab states, the small cosmopolitan United Arab Emirates announced diplomatic recognition of Israel, ostensibly in exchange for preventing formal Israeli annexation of Palestinian territory. But a US attempt to extend the UN embargo on arms exports to Iran failed. Iran announced that a 25-year strategic deal with China was near completion, and also that activities in the port city of Chahbahar would go ahead without Indian participation. India had wanted to assist the construction of Iran's Chahbahar port, in order to compete with Chinese investment in Pakistan's Gwadar port; but held back too long, out of fear of American sanctions.
America's Democrats completed their election ticket, and thereby clarified how the November election would be fought. The social-democratic movement led by Sanders petered out during the virus lockdown, and liberal billionaire donors had their preferred candidates installed. It would again be Trump's autocratic conservative nationalism, against neoliberals with a "cultural Marxist" issue. In 2016, they said that only sexists oppose Hillary; in 2020, they say that only white supremacists oppose Biden and Harris.
