China’s Pandemic Response: A Strategic Maneuver or a Quest for Global Influence?

The COVID-19 pandemic has been one of the most significant global crises of the 21st century, resulting in millions of deaths and a marked decline in global life expectancy. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that around 690 million people fell into extreme poverty due to the pandemic. As scientists continue to investigate the origins of the virus, questions linger over China’s role in handling the crisis and whether its actions reflect a responsible global actor or a state driven by self-interest.

In a landmark ruling five years after the virus first emerged, a Missouri court in the United States ordered China to pay $24 billion in a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey. The lawsuit accused China of concealing the severity of the outbreak and hoarding essential personal protective equipment (PPE) at the peak of the crisis. The ruling has prompted a reassessment of China’s conduct during the pandemic and its implications for global diplomacy.

Hoarding Critical Medical Supplies

At the onset of the pandemic, China, the world’s leading producer of PPE, capitalized on its manufacturing dominance. Between January 24 and February 29, 2020, China reportedly acquired over 25.38 million units of protective gear and 2.02 billion masks, creating a global shortage and leaving other nations reliant on Chinese exports. Later, countries such as Spain and the Netherlands reported receiving defective medical supplies from China, raising questions about quality control and reliability.

Economic Leverage through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)

Amid the pandemic, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) continued to expand, providing infrastructure loans to nations across Asia, Africa, and Europe. While these loans offered short-term financial relief, they also deepened countries’ debt dependence on China, increasing Beijing’s influence over their domestic and foreign policies. Critics argue that China’s strategic use of economic aid under the BRI allowed it to secure long-term geopolitical and economic advantages.

Vaccine Diplomacy as a Geopolitical Tool

As vaccines became crucial in combating COVID-19, China promoted its domestically developed vaccines, Sinopharm and Sinovac, in regions where Western vaccines were less accessible. This “vaccine diplomacy” targeted developing nations in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, often seeking political and economic concessions in exchange for vaccine access. In many cases, countries that received Chinese vaccines were more likely to support Beijing’s policies in international forums, illustrating the geopolitical leverage achieved through health assistance.

Economic Resilience Amid Global Slowdown

While many economies struggled, China’s rapid recovery positioned it to meet the surging global demand for manufactured goods, particularly medical supplies and technology. China’s economy grew by 2.3% in 2020, making it the only major economy to register positive growth that year. This recovery reinforced China’s status as a global manufacturing hub and enabled it to acquire distressed foreign assets, further extending its economic influence.

Media Manipulation and Narrative Control

China’s response to the pandemic extended beyond economic strategies. Domestically, strict censorship suppressed early warnings about the virus, and international disinformation campaigns sought to deflect blame. State-controlled media promoted narratives suggesting the virus originated outside China, aiming to reshape global perceptions. Simultaneously, China projected itself as a compassionate global leader by providing medical aid to struggling nations, bolstering its soft power on the world stage.

Pandemic as a Shield for Strategic Aggression

During the pandemic, China took significant steps to strengthen its domestic control and assert its regional influence. The enforcement of the National Security Law in Hong Kong in June 2020 led to crackdowns on democratic activists, silencing dissent and undermining the region’s autonomy. Similarly, in the Galwan Valley of the India-China border, Chinese troops engaged in a deadly clash with Indian soldiers, diverting global attention from the pandemic to rising geopolitical tensions.

A Reckoning or a Missed Opportunity?

While the Missouri court’s ruling against China may lack enforceable power, it symbolizes a broader reassessment of Beijing’s conduct during the pandemic. Critics argue that China’s actions during this crisis reflect a self-serving agenda rather than a commitment to global solidarity. From hoarding medical supplies to leveraging vaccine diplomacy and expanding influence through the BRI, China appears to have prioritized its national interests, often at the expense of international cooperation.

The pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in the global order, and China’s calculated response has reshaped its image on the world stage — not necessarily as a responsible global leader, but as a powerful state willing to pursue its interests by any means necessary.

Harsh Pandey is a Ph.D. candidate at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.