Editor's note: Tang Bei is an associate professor of international relations and assistant director of the Center for Global Governance Studies at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs at Shanghai International Studies University. She was a visiting scholar at Columbia University from 2014 to 2015. The article reflects the author's opinions, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

In my speech during the town hall discussion on the COVID-19 outbreak at the Munich Security Conference, I quoted an interview by Wen Huibao on a psychological hotline service provided by Tsinghua University during the epidemic. Sitting across from me, Michael Ryan, Executive Director of WHO Health Emergencies Programme, kept taking notes when hearing about the most expressed concerns of medical workers and the general public in those counseling sessions. The audience was also nodding heads when I shared the most frequently mentioned word, "mother."

Nowadays, well-trained analysts can easily use sophisticated models and computer simulations to treat this outbreak as an additional variable in the changing of world economic or geopolitical landscape. So much so that sometimes people tend to overlook the human faces behind the numbers of daily reports. However, if we turn to people who are living their daily lives in the epicenter, everyone would agree the disease is a ruthless torture of humanity. And only with solidarity and compassion can we meet this challenge.

There is an old Chinese saying, people share the same heart and reason (人同此心，心同此理), which illustrates precisely my observations and feelings during the event. However, despite all efforts being made, the virus is indeed turning into an international public health challenge. Instead of depicting this epidemic as a "China problem," it is a matter of urgency for the whole world.

This challenge is no easy task. There are still several unknowns regarding the virus. Even with the diagnostic kits, there is a risk of a false negative. The incubation period can be quite long. And it can be contagious even when patients don't show symptoms. In terms of control and prevention strategy, no consensus has been reached yet. China has explored an approach that seems to be working, albeit having extensive costs. Singapore is taking its own way and the effectiveness remains to be tested. With a more "crafty" virus and less international consensus, we are facing an even more complicated situation compared with the 2002-03 SARS outbreak. And, once again, a vaccine for COVID-19 remains at a distance.

Winning this battle requires every country to work together. More collective endeavors from all parties need to be mobilized. The WHO, standing at the center of international coordination, should demonstrate stronger leadership with a more timely review of the epidemic situation and its recommendations. Also, its capability to bring together scientists all around the world to do collaborative research should be utilized to its fullest potential. The more we know, the less we fear. Besides, drawing lessons from the Ebola outbreak in 2014, special attention should be paid to the relationship between the headquarters and its six regional offices to carry out a coherent action.

And instead of indulging in the false sense of security brought about by travel and trade restrictions, governments should follow the guideline of WHO and establish preparedness systems. WHO guidelines should be fully followed and sufficient funding should be provided to its special contingency program, which aims at preparing developing countries.

Moreover, partners from foundations and the private sector should also be reached and engaged. NGOs, philanthropic organizations, public and private partnerships are all essential for a successful public health response, especially in countries with weak governmental presence. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Doctors Without Borders, The GAVI Alliance all possess rich experience in delivering health services on the ground in developing countries. By proper orchestration, the international society can fill gaps left by the governments' reactions.

R&D institutes and vaccine manufactures should also show social responsibility by carefully balancing profits with larger public health benefits. WHO Director-General has expressed his concern that large donations to be channeled towards vaccine development, deriving the response of much-needed funds for simple public health interventions. It should not be a question of either-or.

If we look back at the history of global responses to infectious diseases over the past decades, we must recognize that this challenge is unprecedented. In successful stories like smallpox eradication and turning the tide of HIV/AIDS epidemic, three factors stand out: a breakthrough on prevention or treatment measures, strong political commitment from the international community and necessary resources contributed, as well as a tailored action plan for each country.

The current situation is not auspicious. No magic dose yet. Guided by the "America First" belief, Trump's administration has cut its health assistance budget, and fundraising for global COVID-19 control didn't get into the G7's agenda this year. WHO is still, not surprisingly, struggling to carry out its global contingency plan with limited staff and resources.

To better address the challenges from viruses and microbes, we need a consensus on the common future of mankind. Not a single piece should be missing from the global health governance.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)