Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international relations

This article needs to be updated. The reason given is: article only covers 2020 developments; subsequent developments particularly politics of vaccines not included. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (February 2022)

Part of a series on the
COVID-19 pandemic
COVID-19 (disease) SARS-CoV-2 (virus) Cases Deaths
Timeline 2019 2020 January responses February responses March responses April responses May responses June responses July responses August responses September responses October responses November responses December responses 2021 January responses February responses March responses April responses May responses June responses July responses August responses September responses October responses November responses December responses 2022 January responses February responses March responses April responses May responses June responses July responses August responses September responses October responses November December 2023 2024
Locations By country and territory Africa Antarctica Asia Europe North America Oceania South America By conveyance Cruise ships Naval ships
International response Endemic phase Evacuations Face masks International aid Origin Lockdowns by country Misinformation by governments Fake treatments Social distancing Software Travel United Nations World Health Organization WTO IP waiver Undercounting of deaths COVID-19 apps Zero-COVID National responses Africa China European Union Germany Ghana India Ireland Netherlands New Zealand Nigeria Philippines Russia Sweden UK government US federal government Vietnam
Medical response Disease testing Breathalyzer Development Drug development Drug repurposing Public health mitigation Vaccines History Research VITT Deployment Authorizations Operation Warp Speed Misinformation and hesitancy US Vaccine card Vaccine passports Current vaccines CoronaVac Covaxin Convidecia Janssen Medigen Moderna Novavax Oxford–AstraZeneca Pfizer–BioNTech Sinopharm BIBP Sputnik V
Variants Variants of concern Alpha Beta Gamma Delta Omicron Other variants Epsilon Zeta Eta Theta Iota Kappa Lambda Mu Cluster 5 Lineage B.1.617
Economic impact and recession Arts and culture Aviation Cannabis Cinema films Disney Fashion Financial markets Food industry Food security Journalism Music Performing arts Retail Shipping Television US sportscasting programs Tourism Video games By country Canada India Ireland Malaysia New Zealand Russia UK US By sport Association football Baseball Basketball Combat sports Cricket Disc golf Gaelic games Gridiron football Ice hockey Motorsport Rugby league
Impacts Animals Alzheimer's disease patients Black people Crime Death rates by country Disability Domestic violence Emergency evacuations Education Female Environment Hospitals Language LGBT community Long-term care Media coverage Mental health symptoms Migration Military Notable deaths Other health issues Politics diplomacy Popular culture Protests Pregnancy Prisons Religion Catholic Church Hajj Science and technology Social media Strikes Suicides Telehealth Xenophobia and racism Society Ireland Malaysia New Zealand Russia UK US
COVID-19 portal
v t e

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected international relations and has caused diplomatic tensions, as well as resulted in a United Nations Security Council resolution demanding a global ceasefire.

Some scholars have argued that the pandemic necessitates a significant rethinking of existing approaches to international relations, with a greater focus on issues such as health diplomacy,^[1] the politics of crisis,^[2] and border politics.^[3] Others have argued that the pandemic is unlikely to lead to significant changes in the international system.^[4] Diplomatic relations have been affected due to tensions around trade and transport of medicines, diagnostic tests, vaccines and hospital equipment related to mitigating the impact of COVID-19.^[5][6] Leaders of some countries have accused others of not containing the disease or responding effectively.^[7][8]

Muzaffar S. Abduazimov mentions that currently, diplomatic practice experiencing "six major trends caused by the pandemic are namely: acceleration of ICTs penetration; reappraisal of information security; ensuring the reliability of public diplomacy; further diversification of responsible duties; the growing role of psychology; and, the emergence of the hybrid diplomatic etiquette and protocol."^[9]