First, I think that even understanding “post-covid” as now, it’s early to look at the overall impacts—and again, see the linked survey. Economists still think this was overall a mistake, from that perspective at least.
Second, as I said in a different response, the reasoning seems to be the claim that they wanted to take back, to slightly paraphrase from memory, “their money, their borders, and their laws”—and yes, laws definitely includes the sort of policy choice he’s pointing to, but it wouldn’t have needed to slow their early purchase nor their excellent distribution system (which would perhaps have been a couple weeks later due to the vaccine approval delay, which they likely could have pushed forward, but given how slowly they started to arrive, this would have made at most a small difference in vaccine timing for most people,) but the other two claims came first, and seemed like the central parts of the question.
First, I think that even understanding “post-covid” as now, it’s early to look at the overall impacts—and again, see the linked survey. Economists still think this was overall a mistake, from that perspective at least.
Second, as I said in a different response, the reasoning seems to be the claim that they wanted to take back, to slightly paraphrase from memory, “their money, their borders, and their laws”—and yes, laws definitely includes the sort of policy choice he’s pointing to, but it wouldn’t have needed to slow their early purchase nor their excellent distribution system (which would perhaps have been a couple weeks later due to the vaccine approval delay, which they likely could have pushed forward, but given how slowly they started to arrive, this would have made at most a small difference in vaccine timing for most people,) but the other two claims came first, and seemed like the central parts of the question.