undetected through eastern Congo. Aid cuts meant fewer health workers were watching out. On May 17th the UN’s World Health Organisation (WHO) called the outbreak a public-health emergency of international concern. By May 20th the tally of almost 600 suspected cases and 139 deaths was suggesting that this epidemic will be the worst Ebola emergency since at least 2018, when more than 2,000 people died in the same region. To avoid such a grim death toll—let alone that of 2014-16, when 11,000 perished in west Africa— urgent, co-ordinated action is needed. So far it has been lacking. To win this fight, scientists need incentives to swiftly make and deploy a vaccine. Donors, especially governments in the rich world, should promise now to buy ample supplies of a vaccine as soon as it is authorised, to encourage drug firms to work faster. On May 20th the WHO said two vaccines are being developed that show promise against the Bundibugyo strain. Although it will be months before either jab is ready, such efforts should be the priority. Even with a vaccine, stopping Ebola requires co-ordination in different countries. In the past America, through its Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and aid spending, would have led this effort. Despite severe cuts under the Trump administration, the CDC still has field offices in Congo and neighbouring Uganda, so it will play a role. But the most important institutions will be the WHO and Africa CDC, which is independent of its American namesake. Africa CDC did well during the covid-19 pandemic and can do so again if given enough outside expertise and funding. Humanitarian NGOs reduced their Ebola-prevention measures last year in Ituri, the province where the outbreak emerged, because of aid cuts. They urgently need funds to pay for protective gear and to recruit more health workers. All this is made much harder by local politics. Eastern Congo is an ideal place for an epidemic to thrive. The state barely exists, and is often predatory where it does. More than 100 militias terrorise the population. Much of North and South Kivu, two provinces where Ebola has been detected, is under the control of an armed group, M23, that says it wants to topple Congo’s national government. Both the government and the militias
have a sorry record of prioritising their own interests above the lives of their compatriots. M23 has resisted calls by NGOs to reopen airports in its territory to let in humanitarian supplies; it accuses the Congolese government of making things worse by keeping banks closed. Mediators, including America and Qatar, should tell both sides to let in supplies and workers; they should also press Rwanda, M23’s patron. This is Congo’s 17th Ebola outbreak in 50 years. It will destroy both lives and livelihoods before it is contained. Fortunately, the virus is not airborne, so it cannot spread as fast as covid-19. Even so, it is a reminder of the need to prepare for the next pandemic. Vaccine research, the genomic sequencing of viruses and disease surveillance are the world’s immune system, protecting it against wider, deadlier outbreaks. When that immunity is weakened, disaster beckons. ■ Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//leaders/2026/05/21/how-to-stop-the-ebola-outbreak
Lessons from the Premier League for Britain’s next premier How a deflated country can bounce back May 21st 2026 If Britain were a football team, it would be flirting with relegation. Its economy is flailing, its people are demoralised and another embarrassing crisis is unfolding at the top. Happily, one British industry provides a game plan for recovery. Forty years ago, English football was a laughing stock. Today, it is a global powerhouse. As we report this week, the Premier League is the most-watched sports competition on the planet and generates £10bn ($13bn) in gross value added a year . Politicians who want to make Britain great again could do worse than learn from the Premier League. One lesson is to play to your strengths. Britain invented football. It is also attractive to footloose capital and talent. The Premier League takes
advantage of this, welcoming foreign investors to buy clubs and foreign coaches and players to make them excellent. It is far more open than its rivals. Openness has fallen out of fashion, but Sir Keir Starmer should know as an Arsenal fan—celebrating his team’s league title this week—that unpopular tactics can work best. His government has adopted the opposite strategy, cutting work visas and keeping taxes hostile to rich foreigners. In footballing terms, he’s got the formation all wrong. Another lesson is to embrace competition. The Premier League is one of the world’s greatest experiments in self-regulation, a case study of the value of ruthless rivalry and the free flow of cash. Yet a foolish cross-party decision to impose an independent football regulator passed into law last summer. English football is no stranger to cheating, from financial doping to a spying scandal at Southampton. But such cases are best dealt with in-house. If the regulator, as feared, puts up hurdles to investment, it would typify Sir Keir’s failure to grasp what made the Premier League (and Britain) strong. Whoever next leads Labour will hear plenty of voices favouring fiddlier rules and greater suspicion of foreign capital. If it is to be Andy Burnham, Manchester’s mayor and the current favourite to unseat Sir Keir, he ought to visit his own constituents in East Manchester—a place transformed by the Emirati investors who took a liking to Manchester City. Britain desperately needs inward investment. The Premier League’s formula of globalised, caution-to-the-wind capitalism is the best way to attract it. Not the nosy managerialism of the Labour left which, like a video assistant referee (VAR), only slows down the action and spoils the fun. Last, Labour should strive for stability at the top, but not at all costs. The worst clubs get through managers almost as fast as Britain does prime ministers. The best have the longest-serving bosses. If Tottenham Hotspur’s awful season holds any lessons, it is that sticking too long with a bad choice is a losing strategy. Britain seems likely to avoid that mistake. Having lost the dressing room and the fans, Sir Keir is bound to be given the boot. Unfortunately, Britain cannot scout the world to find a brilliant new boss. Instead, it must pick a new prime minister from among the 400 or so Labour MPs. None of them
could be mistaken for Pep Guardiola and some of them think the ideal game plan is to put everyone on the left wing and hope for the best. Britain needs a better communicator in the national dugout. Sir Keir hates giving pep talks and loathes the word “vision”. He has a tendency to grumble about how hard his job is. His successor should instil a new sense of belief in a country prone to pessimism. English football’s renaissance from mockable mediocrity to global dominance shows that a comeback is always on. It may be too late for Sir Keir, but not for Britain. ■ Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//leaders/2026/05/21/lessons-from-the-premier-league-for- britains-next-premier
Do most baristas in Norway have a master’s degree? Also this week, West Bengal, rich couples in urban areas, Marcus Crassus, Scotland’s languages, the European Union May 21st 2026 Letters are welcome via email to letters@economist.comFind out more about how we process your letter A recent Free Exchange column (April 4th) highlighted two of the main challenges that the Norwegian government sees for the years ahead: increasing the supply of labour and raising productivity across the economy. As the population ages, pressure on labour supply will increase unless we succeed in bringing more people into work or producing more with fewer hands. We have succeeded with a pension reform in Norway, and the public sector is productive in many areas, but much more must be done.
That being said, parts of the column suggested that balance and precision have at times given way to the demands of a good story. As you noted, Norway spends a lot of money helping other countries, but the single most important contribution here is to Ukraine’s defensive struggle. Norway, with fewer than 6m inhabitants, is among those providing the most military support to Ukraine. My reading is that The Economist generally regards such support as a good thing. Norwegian young people perform well compared with other countries. Eurostat data show that unemployment among people in their 20s is substantially lower in Norway than in Denmark and well below the European average. The share of young people (aged 15 to 29 years) neither in employment nor in education and training is far below the European average. Finally, although Oslo’s coffee bars have enviable quality and expertise, it is not the case that 70% of baristas and others in unskilled jobs have a master’s degree. Only 15% of Norwegian workers have a master’s or equivalent level, and they have not piled up at the espresso machines. I recommend a visit to a coffee bar when you are in Oslo, to experience the quality of coffee produced by skilled baristas without master’s degrees. Jens StoltenbergMinister of financeOslo You presented a skewed assessment of Mamata Banerjee’s tenure as chief minister of West Bengal while glossing over the disturbing anti-democratic mechanics behind the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) electoral success in the state (“Saffron march”, May 9th). Ms Banerjee’s government was not a failure. On several socioeconomic fronts West Bengal significantly outperforms the national average. Thanks to targeted welfare initiatives such as the Kanyashree scheme for girls, the state has a total fertility rate of just 1.6, well below the national replacement level. West Bengal’s infant mortality rate and maternal mortality rate are considerably better than the Indian average. The state leads in student enrolment and scholarship disbursements. Ms Banerjee’s government has overseen poverty-reduction rates that have outpaced richer, industrialised states like Gujarat and Maharashtra