Topic: The Covid-19 coronavirus pandemic
Title: Using Face Negotiation theory to explain China response towards COVID-19 internationally
Introduction
The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been causing severe impacts in many countries since the outbreak in Wuhan, China. The authorities play a crucial role in curbing the deadly disease as well. When a virus transmitted across the border, countries need to work together to curb the virus to prevent more fatality. The essay decided to look at China’s response in controlling the COVID-19 issues using Face Negotiation theory.
Face Negotiation theory
According to Em Griffin in A First Look at Communication Theory (2011), Face Negotiation theory was coined by Stella Ting-Toomey. She pointed out that people from all culture has would try to maintain and negotiate for their face (p. 407). Theorists defined face as “the public self-image that every member of society wants to claim for himself/ herself” (cited in Griffin, 2011, p. 411). She separated the people from all cultures into two types of distinction: Collectivistic culture and individualistic culture (p. 408). She said that people from collectivistic culture identify “with a larger group is responsible for providing care in exchange for group loyalty”, their interdependent self values are we-identity and emphasizes relational connectedness. They are from high-context culture (p. 409, 410).
Meanwhile, people from individualistic culture will “look out for themselves and their immediate families”, their independent self values portray I-identity and is more self-face oriented, and portray a low-context culture (p. 409, 410). Ting-Toomey identified East Asian communities like Chinese, portray a collectivistic culture. When solving a conflict, there are three elements involved a person’s face: face concern, face restoration and face giving.
Figure 1: Face Negotiation Model (Griffin, 2011b).
Ting-Toomey’s model shows that no matter the collectivistic culture cares about mutual-face or other-face, they will go through one of the stages:
- Compromising: solving problems by bargaining or negotiation, or seeking a middle way (p. 412).
- Third-Party Help: Voluntarily seeking someone he or she admires and they have a good relationship (p. 414); e.g., mother
- Avoiding/Obliging: Avoiding means withdraw oneself from a conversation; obliging means accommodating or fulfil the wish of another person in a conflict or discussion (p. 412).
China’s response in controlling COVID-19
Chinese authority’s suppression by the Associated Press (Avoid)
The suppression of the authority contributed to the late of releasing data. The scientists were aware of the emerging diseases, which the virus sample sent by the Wuhan doctors several days before 2020. When the three labs confirmed the virus, the Chinese authorities, particularly the National Health Commission and Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Chinese CDC) distrusted their discoveries and censored them from publishing the results. At the same time, the Chinese CDC also had problems with their researching, due to the lacked new cases (officials censored doctors to report) and knowledge regarding the abnormal protein. Chinese authorities’ delay triggered an oversea case. A confirmed case in Thailand on 11 January 2020. Then, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese CDC and the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences raced to send their discovers to the National Health Commission for approval and published at GISAID, a genomic data-sharing platform (Obliging).
Whistle-blower Dr Li Wenliang (Avoid)
In late December 2019, Li warned his colleagues in a WeChat group to wear protective clothing after detecting a SARS-like virus among seven patients in the Huanan Fruit and Seafood Market (Zhuang, 2020). A few days later, police called him and other seven medical staffs to sign a letter to admit “making false comment” and disrupting social order. He was diagnosed with the virus on 30 January 2020 and died on 7 February 2020. The story did not end well. There was a confusion of Li’s death. Li was announced dead on 6 February at around 10 pm by various Chinese media. But Wuhan Central Hospital announced his dead at 2:58 am the next day. The social media was heated with hashtag regarding Li’s death and freedom of speech, but they were censored after then (2020).
WHO officials’ leaks
Earlier, WHO praised China for controlling the virus. On the other hand, according to The Associated Press (2020, 3 June), WHO officials complained that China was not releasing sufficient data as it would have saved many lives. China delayed for at least a fortnight to submit the detailed data regarding the patients and cases, and more than a week “after three different government labs had fully decoded the information”. WHO officials also said complimenting china was an act to wheedle more information from the Chinese government (2020). However, they worried that pushing china too hard would angering the authorities and “losing access and getting Chinese scientists into trouble.”
Photo 1: Dr Li Wenliang was given a warning letter for spreading rumours regarding the SARS-like virus (BBC, 2020).
Chinese “soft power” diplomacy (Compromising)
On 26 March, the Chinese authority said they would assist the countries who had “weak public health systems and epidemic prevention capabilities, and international organizations such as the European Union, the African Union, and ASEAN” (China International Development Cooperation Agency, 2020). The Chinese government sent their provinces’ medical team to their sister cities in over 50 countries to exchange expertise and provide assistance (Mulakala & Ji, 2020). Furthermore, China’s diverse and immense resources benefitted the countries by supplying medical equipment. Most of them supplied by state-owned and private companies and foundations. Financially, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) considered investing Indonesian’s COVID-19 response and India’s health system preparedness (Saldinger, 2020). China donated US$50 million to the World Health Organisation (WHO) as support to fight the pandemic and “strengthen developing countries’ health systems” (Lo, 2020).
Debate on China’s “soft power” diplomacy
As many countries suffered from the deadly disease, China, who recovered from the virus, provide humanitarian aids to countries that were suffered heavily. There were speculations that China’s aid is a “soft power” to show their generosity. It is also said that it was propaganda to “cover-up” their mistake for suppressing of information (Pei, 2020). Their perspectives are not wrong, as western experts are wary of Chinese power.
In the perspective of conflict management, China did a good job of fixing their mistake. It is a strategy for face-restoration. It is a key strategy to protect the reputation and image of China on the international level. It further shows that it is a responsible partner. It is possible they are not held accountable. Ting-Toomey said collectivists who adopt in integrating or win-win style of resolution focus on “relational-level collaboration.” China’s “soft power” diplomacy is an act of win-win solution, fixing its disastrous mistakes and assisting other nations’ to fight the deadly disease.
Conclusion
Stella Ting-Toomey’s Face Negotiation theory explains the Chinese government’s assistance in the COVID-19 pandemic. China has shown the styles of avoiding, obliging, and compromising. It is undeniable that at the beginning, by exercising authoritarianism, the news of coronavirus is hidden by the public. Furthermore, there were no precautions and warnings from the Hubei authority. As China faced its disastrous mistake and got the finger pointed, it provides humanitarian aids and financial assistance, which balances their fault in a way.
