24. 然而，在考虑国际团结对于在大流行病期间和之后实现人权之必要性的道德依据时，必须正视现实政治的国际关系观与道德公共决策的呼声之间未得到充分讨论的概念冲突。罕有异议的是，我们生活在一个高度相互关联和唇亡齿寒的世界，有着货物和服务的大规模跨境贸易以及人员流动；因此，同样显而易见的是，面对 COVID-19 大流行，我们没有多少余地被单纯的国家或地方自利蒙住眼睛。事实上，在大流行病的背景下，道德方面的必要性与现实政治密不可分，至少应该如此。
24. In considering the ethical rationale for the international solidarity imperative for the realization of human rights during and after the pandemic, however, it is important to confront the underdiscussed conceptual clash between the realpolitik view of international relations and the calls for ethical public policymaking. There is little disagreement that we 77 Inter-American Commission on Human Rights resolution 1/2020, sect. B.I and paras. 11 and 52; Mustapha Dumbuya and others, “The impact of technology on mental health during COVID-19” AfricLaw, 22 May 2020. Available from https://africlaw.com/2020/05/22/the-impact-of-technology-on-mental-health-during-covid-19/. 78 See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=26533&LangID=E; www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=25808&LangID=E; and www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=26369&LangID=E. 79 African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights resolution 449 (LXVI). 80 Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; see also, in the context of the pandemic, articles 3, 43 and 44 of the International Health Regulations. 81 United Nations, “Shared responsibility”, p. 1. 82 Okafor, “International solidarity, human rights and life on the African continent ‘after’ the pandemic”. 83 Ibid. 84 Ibid. live in a highly interconnected and mutually vulnerable world, with massive cross-border trade in goods and services and movement of persons; it should therefore also be clear that the COVID-19 pandemic gives us little meaningful room to be blinded by mere national or local self-interest. In fact, in the context of the pandemic, the ethical imperative is – or at least it should be – inextricably connected to the realpolitik.