[brudgers]

There are several aspects of what I described that do not align with the way I would like the world to work and would prefer if alternative methods were practical. In the world of politics and diplomacy, I don't think they are because politics and diplomacy require engagement with actors who are not driven by scientific methods, generally praised moral theories, or a strong sense empathy or who simply cannot do positive things without first caring for their political survival.

The WHO has the political ability to operate at the ministerial and executive level above regular bureaucracy. A technocrat may not care if a senior WHO official arrives on a bicycle, but the WHO does not always deal with technocrats and a meeting planned with a technocrat may turn out to be a meeting with a politician as well or instead.

That's part of why protocols matter for the WHO more than for Médecins Sans Frontières. Protocols also matter more for the WHO because its primary role is at the diplomatic level even during an emergency. During the same emergency, Médecins Sans Frontières primary mission is on the ground delivering services at the endpoint.