Sweden’s No Lockdown Policy: How That Changed The Outcome
Publisher
Global Views 360
Publication Date
July 1, 2020
URL
Anders Tegnell during the daily press conference outside the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden | Source: Frankie Fouganthin via Wikimedia
Sweden has gone against conventional wisdom in its response to the COVID-19 situation. While the neighbouring countries like Denmark, Finland and Norway imposed strict lockdown on the places and services frequented by the public, Sweden has chosen to not do so at all during the initial phases when COVID-19 started taking the shape of a worldwide pandemic. The public places like Cafes, restaurants, gyms, malls, playgrounds, ski slopes and some of the schools were kept open all across Sweden.
The country’s fight against the threat of pandemic was handled exclusively by the Public Health Authority, with no political interference. They believed that a lockdown only serves to delay the virus, which is not necessary since the health services are equipped to deal with the cases. They also made it clear that achieving herd immunity is also not their aim. The public authorities in Sweden instead relied on the public's sense of responsibility, and appealed to them to do frequent hand washing, observe social distancing and keep people over 70 years old from going out.
The state epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, made multiple statements about the state’s unusual approach, such as 1) “Once you get into a lockdown, it’s difficult to get out of it,”, “How do you reopen? When?” 2) “There is no evidence whatsoever that doing more at this stage would make
any difference. It’s far better to introduce stringent measures at very specific intervals, and keep them running for as little time as possible” , 3) " As long as the healthcare system reasonably can cope with and give good care to the ones that need care, it's not clear that having the cases later in time is better”.
The assumption of public responsibility did not work for Sweden and there were people out on the streets, in cafes, restaurants and playgrounds. Not wearing a mask was the social norm instead of the reverse. The models for charting the virus spread given by the concerned authorities also turned out to be faulty forcing them to rescind it. Over 2000 Swedish researchers and doctors signed a petition which claimed that there was not enough testing,tracking or isolation in the country. They believed that the authority has clearly not planned their response and that the authority’s claim for herd immunity has very little scientific basis, even though the government has repeatedly claimed that herd immunity is not what they were aiming for.
Sweden’s lax approach to the combating of coronavirus forced its neighbouring Scandinavian countries to close the border for the Swedish citizens. Some of the Swedish officials were worried for the possible harm to the long term relations between Sweden and its neighbours. Also, the plan of letting life go on as usual to avoid the economic recession occurring due to a lockdown also failed as it didn’t shield the country from economic slowdown.
Here comes the question; was the lockdown successful or not? There are some comparisons that have been drawn which indicate more deaths per 100,000 people than in nearby countries with homogenous population, even though it is significantly lesser than some of the European countries. While the infections rates are double that of Denmark, the death rates in comparison are much higher. This difference has been attributed to the fact that approximately half of these deaths have occurred in old care homes despite the stated priority of the officials to protect the elderly. This has been in part to the volunteer program, which replaced symptomatic old age home cares with new volunteers, hence increasing exposure. Another factor is the lack of protective equipment in such homes, along with laws preventing administration of medical procedures without the presence of doctors. There were reports of people threatened with lawsuits for banning visitors.
All of this led to Mr.Tegnell claiming that the ideal policy would have been something between what Sweden adopted and what the other countries did, in the light of what they know now. However this claim of Mr.Tegnell will be put to test when the second wave comes, later in time.
Support us to bring the world closer
To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.
Story of Rakesh Tikait: Farmer Leader Whose Tears were More Powerful Than the UP Government
On the evening of 28th January, 2021‚ Rakesh Tikait—national spokesperson of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU)—had an emotional outburst—while addressing the media. His outburst however became a major call back to the farmers across the Western Uttar Pradesh and was a turning point in the protest of the Centre’s new farm reform laws. But who is Rakesh Tikait? And how did he emerge as the new face of the protest? These are the questions which this article is going to answer.
51-year-old Rakesh Tikait hails from Sisauli village of Muzaffarnagar district, Uttar Pradesh. He is the second son of the elder farmer leader, late Mahendra Singh Tikait, who was the president of the Indian Farmers Union. Rakesh Tikait also has four brothers, the eldest one being Naresh Tikait—the national president of the BKU. Rakesh Tikait married Sunita Devi from Dadri village in Baghpat district in 1985. They have a son Charan Singh and two daughters, Seema and Jyoti. Tikait holds a Master of Arts degree from Meerut University.
Tikait joined the Delhi police force in 1985. He was a part of the police force until 1992—an year before which his father Mahendra Singh Tikait held a series of protests against the enhanced rate of fertilisers, hike in electricity rates, and regulation in supply of sugarcane to the sugar mills. He also pitched in for local farmers who were seeking higher compensation for land acquired on the outskirts of Lucknow for setting up a TELCO unit. The movement started fading due to pressure from the government. Hence, Rakesh decided to quit his job in 1993-94 and started taking part in the farmers’ fight with BKU. In the recent past, he has contested two elections, one on a Rashtriya Lok Dal ticket and another as an Independent, but was unsuccessful both times.
As the Tikait family hails from Sisauli, Muzaffarnagar, the family heads Baliyan Khap of 84 villages, giving it considerable influence within the Jat community of Western UP and Haryana.
Due to the Jat community's custom of passing on authority to the eldest son, Tikait’s elder brother Naresh Tikait took over the mantle of both the BKU and Baliyan Khap from Mahendra Singh Tikait. The BKU also has strong influence among the Malik and Deshwal Khaps. The Tikait brothers have been trying to live up to the towering standards that their father has set. Mahendra Singh Tikait was a well-knows figure among both Hindu and Muslim farmers of Western UP, who had shared economic interests.
He has led numerous massive demonstrations against the Centre and state government on farmers' issues and was the voice of farmers. In 1988, lakhs of farmers gathered at Boat Club in the heart of Delhi and placed their 35 point charter of demands, seeking various concessions for farmers including higher prices for sugarcane, cancellation of loans, lowering of water tax and waiver of electricity dues. The protest was Tikait’s biggest protest which eventually brought the Rajiv Gandhi government to its knees.
In 2007, Rakesh Tikait, for the first time contested independently from Khatauli, Muzaffarnagar. In 2014, Rakesh Tikait Joined the Rashtriya Lok Dal (RLD) and contested the 2014 Lok Sabha elections from Amroha. This came as a shock to many as Tikait had been critical of RLD and some argue a BJP supporter. A striking case in point being Mahapanchayat in Muzaffarnagar in 2013 that led to communal riots in west UP was in fact jointly addressed by leaders of BKU and BJP.
“I had to choose between RLD and others. I found RLD better. It is the party that has taken up the issue of farmers,” Tikait told the Times of India. However, Tikait failed in both his attempts.
Rakesh Tikait has constantly been the voice of farmers. In 2014, Tikait organized the Dunkal movement at the Red Fort in Delhi demanding the government to increase the price of millet in the interest of farmers of Rajasthan. Tikait’s demonstrations against the government landed him in Jaipur Jail. However, his protests were successful as the government eventually agreed to the farmers’ demand.
The ongoing farmers protest lost support after the unfortunate events which took place at Red Fort on 26th of January. On this day, the Indian tricolor was allegedly disrespected, several farmers and policemen were victims of violence, the protest aggravated to an extent where a farmer even lost his life. The leaders and the decision makers of the movement did not realize that it is always difficult to control and discipline a rally. A rally on move is more vulnerable to anti-social elements and government linked saboteurs to blend with the crowd and create mayhem. This not only discredited the farmers’ movement but over 13 prominent leaders of the movement including Yogendra Yadav were detained by the police. On 28th of January, Tikait’s turned emotional as he said “ I saw the BJP MLA [allegedly identified by the farmers as Loni MLA Nand Kishore Gurjar] who had come here to attack our elders, my sardar brothers. I could not let that happen, they have all come here on my call, I am responsible for them. This is wrong, the people have chosen them, the people cannot be harmed. I had told the government that I would surrender, but it is my responsibility to make sure all my farmers are safe. I knew what could happen if the police took them if they left from here on their tractor’s trolleys. I knew when they reached Hapur and beyond, BJP and RSS workers would begin pelting stones on them. I cannot let that happen. The farmer was never scared, the farmer will never be scared. Those who incited violence on (January 26th) must be investigated by the government. Tell people the truth.” With a parched throat and welling eyes he said, “I will drink water when the farmers send it from their homes.” This emotional video went viral across Uttar Pradesh through WhatsApp and television telecast. Hundreds of people packed food and water and set off from Uttar Pradesh to reach Delhi. They all broke their fast after Tikait sipped the water that they brought. Tikait’s tears not only guarded the Ghazipur protest site from what seemed like a crackdown but he also reignited the spark and revived the dying protest.
Critics said that the government had committed a blunder by falsely assuming that the protest had lost its support and sympathy amongst the public after the unfortunate events of Jan 26th. The police did not face much difficulty vacating the camps at the Ghazipur border by late evening of 28th Jan. The government too perceived Tikait as a loose canon and an irresponsible leader. Furthermore, the police did not detain Tikait along with other leaders. At a point of time, he was the only leader left on the stage at the protest site in Ghazipur. Critics speculate that they did not detain him as he previously was a supporter of BJP and in fact voted for the party in the 2019 elections and hence the BJP thought they could still convince him to take a middle ground and further dilute the movement. However, Tikait turned the tables on the administration. His address resonated across the entire Jat community of western UP, which till then had been passive in extending support to him. The Yogi government cannot afford to take any more chances as the “Jat land” has firmly supported BJP for the past six years, especially after the Muzaffarnagar riots of 2013. In addition to this, since the Yogi government came to power in 2017, they have increased the state advised price of Sugarcane by only Rs.10 per quintal. The state advised price for 2020-21 has not been announced yet although the crushing operations have begun at mills as early as November 2020. What is more is that the UP government owes the farmers over Rs.12,000 crore against the cane purchased in the current and the previous season. In UP, a greater source of farmer anger apart from the three reform laws and the SAP of sugarcane is for doubling electricity charges for both irrigation pumps and domestic use. The hike in diesel price by Rs.10/L in one year has further fueled their anger.
Now, a Kisan Mahapnachayat is also taking place in Muzaffarnagar. The same district where the Mahapanchayat was held after the riots in Muzaffarnagar. The latter Mahapanchayat played a crucial role in the 2017 elections.
The Indian Farmers Union has constantly been in talk with the government. Rakesh Tikait has once again been the voice of farmers. Now, the government has to decide whether the movement will end or not given that the Farmers are demanding a complete withdrawal of all three laws.
