《欧洲论坛》报2023年1月14日报道，对来自中国的旅客进行新冠检测的话题在近期的媒体报道中引起热议。澳大利亚表示，他们不会要求旅客接受新冠检测，但出于“谨慎”考虑，他们将要求中国旅客接受新冠检测。
日本要求中国旅客在乘机前提供48小时核酸阴性证明，并决定要求中国旅客在抵达后再次进行新冠检测，对核酸阳性的旅客进行为期一周的隔离。摩洛哥则刚刚禁止中国旅客入境。
为国际旅行提供48小时核酸阴性证明是个不错的主意，但不乏批评之声，对此存在一些消极的观点。有人质疑：这有什么意义？一个国家在国内对新冠疫情没有限制，却对入境旅客有新冠相关的限制，这样公平吗？
有一种批评声音是，在旅行前48小时进行新冠检测没有多大用处。住在没有机场的城市意味着要进行乘机前的新冠检测，检测完再乘坐公共交通工具前往最近的机场，在这个过程中，感染病毒的可能性很大。因此，在到达机场后进行新冠检测可能是更好的选择。
然而，对旅客进行新冠检测是有正当理由的。其中一个理由是，新冠变异株的致病率可能降低，也可能升高，这些变异株可能会逃避疫苗接种或对治疗没有反应，直到它们随着时间的推移被测试、测序和观察后才知道。
新冠病毒出现变异的可能性非常大。其中一个变异株就是XBB.1.5，它已经感染了超过40%的美国病例，并且正在席卷英国。一些报告表明，这个毒株比其他变体传播速度更快，更难以规避，甚至还有一个增压突变体F486P，这个突变体让很多健康专家感到担忧。
令中国政府担心的与其说是变异或突变的可能性，不如说是对病毒的担忧，这是一种完全不同的病毒，一种政治主义甚至种族主义的病毒。
一些国家认为中国缺乏透明度。中国外交部在1月5日的新闻发布会上否认了这一点，他们在发布会上强调已多次与世卫组织召开会议，并于 2022年12月9日、12月30日，2023年1月3日和1月5日共享了相关信息。此外，中国还共享了目前在该国活跃的两种毒株的基因组数据（与 GISAID）以及XBB.1.5变种的信息，该变种是在上海检疫中发现的，由一名外国旅客带入中国。显然，缺乏透明度是无稽之谈。
对中国旅客实施限制，但不对来自其他国家的旅客实施限制的国家这样做是出于其他原因。这些仅针对中国的强制要求需要看清它们的本质：这是双管齐下的攻击。一是“针锋相对”，中国已经并将继续要求每个入境人员持48小时核酸阴性证明。这不是种族主义或出于政治目的，这是确保中国人民健康安全的明智之举。这个要求适用于所有进入中国的人，无论他们来自何方，无论其种族。二是只有中国旅客需要提供核酸阴性证明、入境检测甚至完全禁止中国人入境，这是解决全球问题的政治手段。这种手段是毫无益处的。在实行这些要求的国家的人民眼中，中国人“被迫失去人性”，这对全球和谐是有害的，对任何实行这些要求的国家都是有害的。
需要重申的是，透明度不是问题根源。自2019年12月发现新病毒以来，中国一直保持信息公开透明，中国于2019年12月31日向美国疾控中心和世卫组织提供信息，并于2020年1月12日共享基因组序列。在新冠大流行期间，中国在与所有国家打交道时都展现了平等的形象，并通过向低收入和发展中国家捐赠疫苗、发展销售和制造合作伙伴关系来发挥全球领导作用。
2023年1月8日是一个重要的日子。这是中国向世界其他地区重新开放的日子。这也是一些国家选择将中国排除在外，一些国家则只允许按其条件入境的日子。有报道称中国“猛烈抨击”这些限制，但像往常一样，这些报道被夸大了。中国外交部发言人实际上所说的与“猛烈抨击”截然不同，她说：“我们随时准备加强与国际社会其他成员的沟通，共同努力战胜新冠。同时，我们不认为一些国家对中国采取的入境限制措施是有科学依据的。其中一些措施是不合适且完全无法接受的。我们坚决反对将疫情措施用于政治目的，我们也将本着“对等原则”，针对不同情况采取相应措施。”
当其他国家歧视中国公民时，中国很可能会采取措施，但通常情况下，中国会因以对等方式回应而被指责为侵略。
(作者： 杰瑞·格雷)
“Political virus”are attacking reopening China
EUROP’S TRIBUNE WEEKLY :
The subject of Covid tests for travellers from China is arousing lots of commentary in recent media reports. Australia said they wouldn’t require travellers to be tested then, in an “abundance of caution”, said they would.
Japan needed a 48-hour test prior to flying, then decided they would require tests on arrival and one-week quarantine for positive results. Morocco just banned Chinese travellers.
Providing a 48-hour negative test result for international travel is not a bad idea but has detractors, there are some negatives points. Some ask: what’s the point? And it’s a fair question when there are no Covid restrictions within a country, is it fair that there should be restrictions on entering that country?
One criticism is that a test 48 hours before travel isn’t much use. Living in a city without an airport means taking a test, then getting onto public transportation, travelling to the nearest airport. There are many opportunities for a virus to strike. Testing on arrival could be a better option.
There are however, valid reasons for testing travellers, one is variants which could become less pathogenic or could become more so, they may evade vaccinations or fail to respond to therapeutics, nobody knows until they’ve been tested, sequenced and observed over time.
There is a very real prospect of variants arising. One that has, is the XBB.1.5 Variant which has infected over 40% of US cases and is sweeping the UK. Some reports suggest that this is faster spreading, and more evasive than other variants and even has a supercharged mutation the F486P. This kind of situation has many health experts worried.
What causes Chinese authorities to worry is not so much the prospect of variants or mutations, although they are rightly concerned about them, it’s a completely different virus, the virus of politicism, even racism.
Some countries suggest China lacks transparency. This has been denied by China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) in their 5th January press briefing where they confirm meetings with WHO and sharing of information on December 9th; December 30th; January 3rd: and January 5th. Furthermore, China shared genome data (with GISAID) of the of the two strains currently active in the country as well as information on the XBB.1.5 variant which was found in Shanghai under quarantine conditions and brought into China by a foreign traveller. Clearly, lack of transparency isn’t the real cause.
Countries introducing restrictions on Chinese travellers but not from other countries are doing this for other reasons. These enhanced requirements, from only China, need to be seen for what they are: a two-pronged attack; the first part is a “tit for tat”. China has and will continue to require 48-hour negative test from every person entering the country. This is not racist or political; this is a sensible precaution to ensure the health and safety of the Chinese people. It applies to everyone entering China, wherever they come from, whatever their ethnicity.
Secondly, to suggest that only China needs to provide negative tests, tests on arrival or even to completely ban arrivals from China is a political approach to a global problem. It is not helpful. It serves to dehumanise Chinese people in the eyes of those countries’ populations and that is harmful to global harmony and harmful to any country practicing it.
It needs to be reiterated that transparency isn’t the issue. Since identifying a new virus in December 2019, China supplied information to USA’s CDC and WHO on December 31st 2019 and shared the genome sequence on January 12th 2020 and has provided open and transparent information ever since. It has shown equality in dealing with all nations throughout this pandemic and global leadership to Low Income and Developing Nations with vaccine donations, sales and manufacturing partnerships.
January 8th is an important date. It is the date on which China reopens to the rest of the world. It is also the date on which some countries have chosen to exclude China and others to only allow conditional access on their terms. There are some reports of China “lashing out” at these restrictions. As usual, these reports are exaggerated. What the MFA spokesperson actually said was very different to “lashing out”, she said: “We stand ready to step up communication with the rest of the international community and work together to prevail over COVID. Meanwhile, we do not believe the entry restriction measures some countries have taken against China are science-based. Some of these measures are disproportionate and simply unacceptable. We firmly reject using COVID measures for political purposes and will take corresponding measures in response to varying situations based on the principle of reciprocity”.
It is likely, and reasonable, China will take measures when countries discriminate against Chinese citizens but, as usually happens, they will be accused of aggression for responding with reciprocity.
(Jerry Grey)