CThe oronavirus reached Latin America later than Europe, but it has established itself. A quarter of confirmed cases worldwide are in the region, and researchers have warned that the death toll is likely to triple in October to almost 400,000.
The two countries with the deadliest outbreaks share populist leaders, the Brazilian right-wing Jair Bolsonaro and the Mexican leftist Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
Both helped fuel the outbreaks in their respective countries, minimizing the threat of the virus when it first arrived, Bolsonaro continues to do so, and dismisses proven repressive measures, from wearing masks to social distancing.
But it would be simplistic to present the coronavirus crisis across the continent as a consequence of populism. Infections in Peru and Chile, which have technocratic center-right governments, have outnumbered those in Mexico.
This may be due in part to Mexico’s decision to reject widespread testing: Half of all its tests are positive, one of the highest rates in the world, suggesting that mild cases are not being investigated. In England less than 1% of tests are now positive.
However, there is no doubt that both Peru and Chile have a serious problem, a reminder that even countries that took the virus seriously from the start and caused blockades across the country have been severely affected by Covid-19.
According to analysts, a key reason for this is the large wealth gap in the world’s most unequal region. Overcrowded homes and unsafe work make it difficult for people to get away, even when ordered by the government, and underfunded and overburdened health systems can exacerbate tolls.
“What you do see very clearly is the link between inequality and infection rates, in the way the coronavirus developed,” said Ivan Briscoe, director of the Latin America program at Crisis Group.
“In Peru, Chile and parts of Colombia, although the blockades were strict and the national governments lined up behind them, the economic reality meant that people could not settle for them as the weeks and months passed.”
The disease was brought to many countries by middle and upper class people returning from vacations abroad in areas where the disease was already rampant.
Then poverty facilitated and fueled the spread of the virus, and the poor are now suffering the worst, while the wealthy can afford to isolate themselves and seek treatment when sick.
One of the first cases in Brazil was emblematic of how Covid-19 arrived and who it affected. A wealthy woman who had traveled to Italy and felt ill enough to undergo a test reportedly did not tell her housekeeper, Cleonice Gonçalves, her suspicions. Days later, Gonçalves was dead.
“Income inequality in Latin America, combined with a stressed health care system, means that low-income citizens are very likely to be most affected by the crisis,” said Linnea Sandin, associate director of the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. thinktank wrote in a recent analysis of inequality and coronaviruses in the region.
“Thirty percent of the region lives below the poverty line, and one in five people lives in a poor neighborhood. 60% of Latin Americans are employed in the informal sector, many without access to benefits or labor guarantees. “
People in informal jobs are less likely to be able to work from home or take sick leave, so many have continued to work during lockdown and sometimes sickness.
Crowded housing makes it more difficult for those who can stay home to get away from their infected family or neighbors. Many slums lack running water, making sanitation difficult. Conditions like malnutrition and exposure to contamination could lead to higher infection rates, Sandin said.
Inequality may not tell the whole story. While the least unequal country in the region, Uruguay, has been one of the most successful in containing its outbreak, neighboring Paraguay, which has high levels of poverty and corruption, has also managed to keep the greedy at bay.
But inequality has fueled the pandemic, and will be exacerbated by it. The IMF warns of a sharp contraction in the regional economy, which will make people who are already vulnerable even more vulnerable, and any measure to support them will be more difficult to finance and less likely to become a reality.
.
