Correction of deaths raises questions

After a “technical” correction, the official number of people who died from the coronavirus in Wuhan is suddenly 50 percent higher. There are good reasons for the wrong number. The credibility problem is somewhere else.

Chaos at the beginning

The Chinese authorities argue that the correction is mainly due to the early days of the epidemic. Wuhan was the first city in which the virus appeared frequently in January – it was accordingly surprised and overwhelmed. The hospitals were overrun with patients, the system to fight the virus had to be started up, the authorities write. That is why not all cases were recorded.

That is quite possible. Smartphone pictures from the first few days show masses of desperate people looking for help and storming hospital staff. Doctors worked until they fell asleep at the workplace from exhaustion. There was always the fear of being infected. Understandably, some deaths were not registered and many documents were never filled out. It should be mentioned here that Switzerland does not always manage to keep its pandemic statistics up to date. And the local conditions are not nearly as dramatic as the conditions in Wuhan in January and February.

Everything is fine, says the propaganda

The “Global Times”, the international mouthpiece of Chinese state propaganda, speaks of a “responsible correction”, which is not a political problem, but just a technical question. However, it would only be that simple if the authorities communicated openly and transparently from the start. But at least at the beginning, they tried to downplay the outbreak. In January, they did not report any new cases from Wuhan for days because it was not politically appropriate. Doctors who warned of the new lung disease were reprimanded and accused of spreading false news.

Now that the first wave of infection has been warded off, Chinese propaganda speaks of a victory in the war against the virus. She emphasizes that the new cases appearing in China occur almost exclusively in people who have just entered the country and who have introduced the virus from abroad. National pride is conjured up and the merits of the authoritarian Chinese system praised, which alone is capable of such a heroic achievement. This is underlined by deliveries of aid to other countries, each accompanied by fanfares.

This triumphant appearance is irritating. Because – at least in public – it is hardly accompanied by a critical questioning of the actions of the authorities. No admission that mistakes were made. This leaves a stale aftertaste: is there perhaps more behind the “technical” correction of the death toll in Wuhan than the authorities admit?