The ruling powers have no interest in doing it. This is more a political problem than a technical one. Many similar choices have been made to go down the path we're currently on:

- To treat it as a "third world" issue, as such diseases often are, rather than taking it seriously. Like Sweden health officials believing their cultural superiority alone would protect them.

- Focus on scapegoating China rather than adopt appropriate measures at home, those recommended by the WHO over a year ago and only implemented in places that have now had some successes - China, Vietnam, South Korea, New Zealand...

- Delayed lockdowns that reopen early without any appropriate tracking capabilities. They reopen early to satisfy short-term profit motives and little else: businesses reopening (like Europe for tourist season) and desperate people having few options outside of taking unnecessary jobs that interface with the public - itself a product of not paying people to stay home during a global pandemic.

- The building of a denialist movement that aligns well with corporate-friendly political movements. Different flavors of denialism for different political movements. e.g. anti-maskers doing protests vs. Fauci casting doubt about masks early on, likely to protect PPE supplies for healthcare workers, as strategic stockpiles had been devastated by decades of neoliberalism.

- Zero international consequences for countries that ignore these rules and become large reservoirs of virus.

- Vaccine availability falling along typical colonial lines, benefiting rich white people within and between countries.

- The decision to privatize vaccine production, prioritizing intellectual property over availability. Consequently, long delays in production, national resources going to purchase vaccine rather than directly ramping up production, and an intellectual property regime that treats other countries using information about these vaccines to protect their populations like it's some kind of horrible crime or strategic disadvantage.

The issue here is that the solutions to our collective problem, here, are all at odds with the established economic hegemony. There is a very direct conflict between people staying home and an economic system that depends on forcing people into low-paying jobs rather than waiting out economic downturns (or a pandemic) with a robust safety net. There is a very direct conflict between an international financial system that has been pushing for the prioritization of IP over national interest for decades (it's actually a very recent development that there would be any expectation that, say, India respect the US's IP let alone prioritize it over public health) and collaborative worldwide efforts to eradicate the virus. There is a very direct conflict between (nearly) everyone staying home and an economy largely driven by demand for unnecessary in-person services, something you see every time there's an article on the plight of restaurants and restaurant workers.

The only way out of this is to luck out with vaccine efficacy (though vaccines are on track to be available to all nations on the order of years, not months), additionally luck out with unexpectedly wide and equitable production and distribution (making it months not years), or a dramatic shift away from a profit-dominated regime (people get to protect themselves but the economy must be, at least temporarily, reconfigured to handle lower demand and growth).