Jeff Kingston, Editor of this special issue, assembled a team of contributors from all over the region and is grateful for their working on a tight deadline to assess the pandemic in Asia as of July 2020. In editing this volume he received valuable editorial assistance from Laney Bahan, guidance from Mark Selden and production processing assistance from Joelle Tapas, Hannah LaTourette and Yayoi Koizumi who shepherded the manuscripts from submission to publication with patience and acuity.

This transnational collaborative special issue is an effort to assess the impact and implications of the COVID-19 outbreak in Asia. This is a two-part special issue with Part I focusing mostly on East Asia, while Part II includes case studies from South and Southeast Asia in addition to transnational geo-political assessments. Most of the essays feature probing analyses of public policies and pandemic politics, but some provide more personal reflections on life in a time of outbreak (see Chen, Cleveland, Horiguchi, and Wake in Part I).

A generation ago, infectious diseases were seen as a medical backwater, with the eradication of smallpox and widespread vaccination against polio. However, the emergence of AIDS in the early 1980s, followed by SARS in 2003, pandemic influenza in 2009 and Ebola on an unprecedented scale in 2013-14 showed that infectious diseases of zoonotic origin could cause major new pandemics. Covid-19 has shown that very old public health techniques of quarantine and isolation are still needed to respond to new outbreaks. Public health always tries to get ahead of an emerging epidemic but rarely succeeds.

Reeling from a devastating bushfire season, Australia was slow to respond to the Covid-19 threat, but when modelling in mid-March showed the same pattern of growth that had overwhelmed European health systems, a closely knit network of public health experts gained the ear of government and rapid national action was taken closing workplaces and imposing stay at home orders. With investments in localized testing, contact tracing and sequencing to track the genomic fingerprint of cases, by the end of April new cases had been brought to near zero. Australia's successful containment efforts have paralleled those of regional neighbours such as China, South Korea, Vietnam and Japan, in stark contrast to the uncontained spread in the United States, Australia's traditional ally. The Australian government has tried to navigate these geopolitical tensions by moderating the Trump administration's attempts to turn the pandemic into a political battlefield. Renewed outbreaks in Australia at the end of June suggest SARS-CoV-2 will not be totally eliminated in Australia, but continuing control efforts will bring it to ‘virtual elimination’.

There is a longstanding and fundamental asymmetry in level of mutual understanding between the US and China. Chinese citizens are avid consumers of American media and cultural products, whereas most Americans are woefully unfamiliar with even the basics of Chinese history and culture. This asymmetry has resulted in a situation where the US is in danger of misinterpreting or misunderstanding Chinese motivations in bilateral relations, particularly in times of crisis. This paper recounts how the Covid-19 epidemic of 2020 exacerbated existing tensions between the US and China, and how these escalations in state-to-state conflict were in large part due to America's information deficit with the PRC.

In the early stage of the coronavirus outbreak in China, social media were bursting with anger and desperation. Many pleaded for medical help, called for public attention to the unattended and asked for accountability for local officials who failed to respond to the public health crisis in time. But with the epicenter shifting to Europe and North America, a series of social media tactics, highlighting China's successful containment efforts, while disparaging foreign countries' responses, and spinning the origin of the coronavirus outbreak, facilitated a nationalist takeover of social media sites in China.

Hong Kong made it through the first half of 2020 relatively unscathed by Covid-19, largely due to a first-class public-health response strongly supported by the city's population. The impact of the disease on its economy will be severe, but society, prepared psychologically and practically by its encounter with SARS in 2003, will survive the outbreak with little trauma. Politically, the outbreak has been turned to advantage by the government to dampen the city's anti-government protests. As a result of its smart handling of Covid-19, the disease will not be Hong Kong's big event of 2020; rather it will be relegated to very much second place, far behind the Chinese government's imposition of a National Security Law.

Taiwan has managed to avoid expansive lockdowns and the suspension of everyday life seen elsewhere during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this sense, the COVID-19 pandemic may push Taiwan toward greater self-reliance, as well as increase Taiwan’s sense of subjective distance from other parts of the world. This may be the irony of increased international attention on Taiwan because of its successful handling of the pandemic.

Taiwan was the first country to anticipate the threat of COVID-19, to send a medical team to investigate the initial outbreak in China, and to implement a comprehensive and successful public health response that avoided repeated infections or catastrophic lockdowns. Counter-intuitively, Taiwan's success was achieved in part due to its exclusion from international bodies such as the World Health Organization, which led it to adopt a highly vigilant approach to health threats, especially those that emerge in China, whose irredentist claims impinge on Taiwan's participation in the international community and constitute an existential military threat. Taiwan's response to COVID-19 was recast by its diplomatic representatives into “The Taiwan Model”, a formulation used to pursue increased international recognition and participation.

With mass-scale testing and extensive contact-tracing, South Korea's response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been among the strongest in the world. This success has often been credited to the Korean public's cultural willingness to trust their government and put up with measures that supposedly infringed on their liberties and privacy. While the trust has indeed been important, the reductive attempts to locate the source of the people's trust in Korea's Confucian heritage, homogeneous society, or deferential culture are misplaced. Contrary to the orientalist caricature, South Korea's political culture is marked by low trust in government and deep polarization along ideological lines, making it an obstacle to be overcome rather than a foundation for success. This paper will analyze the measures taken by the Moon Jae-in administration to manage the fractious politics surrounding the outbreak and foster the public trust in the government's response, and also explore the limits of such measures.

The triad of robust state capacity, strong social trust, and competent leadership has been proposed as essential for a successful national response to the COVID-19 crisis. The flow of information among individuals and entities responsible for the response, and from them to the public, is the thread which unites and activates this triad itself. Effective response depends on timely and unambiguous information being openly available to government bodies, leaders, and society alike. Although Japan's pandemic experience at the time of writing has been mercifully mild, the official Japanese response has objectively been quite flawed on many counts. What can be observed about the accessibility and transparency of the information concerning the pandemic that has been provided to the Japanese public?

As the first phase of Japan's response to COVID-19 ends with reasonable success, the country now moves on to the second phase. This essay aims to explain the first phase response from three perspectives. First, how does Japan's response compare to that in Taiwan and South Korea? How and why did Japan lag behind? Second, despite not matching the success of these regional neighbors, Japan has been relatively successful. What accounts for this success? Third, we will examine several unresolved issues during this first phase such as testing capacity, drug treatment and development of a vaccine.

The Tōhoku disasters of March 11, 2011 were unique in human history: a 9.0 earthquake (the largest ever recorded in Japan), a tsunami that peaked at 40 meters, devastating the coastline of northeastern Japan, and 3 nuclear reactors in meltdown. The unlikely convergence of these 3 events seemed to represent the ultimate Black Swan, a disaster whose scope and complexity was beyond imagining. Nearly a decade after the 3.11 Tohoku disasters, the COVID-19 pandemic emerged to stand alongside Fukushima as the most significant crises of the modern era. This paper compares the Fukushima nuclear crisis to the viral pandemic, discussing how political dysfunction has contributed to the ambiguity associated with perceived risk in these culture transforming events.

This short essay is a personal reflection by a socio-cultural/medical anthropologist of Japan with a long-standing research interest in hikikomori (social withdrawal). I re-examine the notions and the roles of so-called “experts.” Then, I will situate the “new normal” under the pandemic in relation to definitions of hikikomori. I conclude by sharing my hopes for a renewed sense of sociality in and beyond the pandemic age.

My daughter was born in March during COVID-19. Because of the pandemic, my baby cannot meet her grandparents who live overseas, as Japan has implemented an entry ban for most foreign nationals. It should have been a special time for my family, but now there is no way of knowing when we will be able to see each other again. As a foreigner in Japan and a new mom, it is a very challenging time. All I can do is wait for the Japanese government to lift the travel bans and hope that the COVID crisis will end soon so that I can be with my family again and introduce my daughter to them.

The COVID-19 crisis has severely impacted migrant workers in Asia. This article compares the cases of India and Singapore to understand how these countries have dealt with their migrant populations in response to the crisis, as well as in relation to how they envision their place in society and regulates their rights. This is revealing for the deeply ingrained sense of socioeconomic inequality that informs how these countries narrate their own relatively recent economic success stories on the global stage. The idea of a ‘new India’ and ‘global city Singapore’ are both based on entrenched notions of inclusion and exclusion.

This essay examines a history of US reports on pandemics, which has made it difficult for Americans to feel empathy for affected Asians and Asian Pacific Island Desi Americas (APIDAs). Key examples from the times of HIV/AIDS and SARS show how Asians and APIDAs remained misunderstood in America because of the black-and-white binary that obscures the wide spectrum of others. The resultant lack of empathy is foundational to the current, Cold War-like mentality of fear. The escalation of US-China tension around the pandemic today, then, may be seen as taking both nations deeper into a Second Cold War. By letting ourselves not feel for each other, we miss an opportunity to collaborate globally for virus eradication.