I fully agree with your assessment and have been reading some of these bulletins . The WHO was not derlict in its mandate. Every day in January they were identifying potential health risks in bulletinsOn 10th January WHO published:
Infection prevention and control during health care when novel coronavirus (nCoV) infection is suspected
(The advice might have been inadequate but it clearly recognised human to human transmission.)
The linked article says:
The WHO kept incorrectly repeating that (a) Covid-19 could not be transmitted from human to human and subsequently that (b) international air travel out of and into China was safe, nearly two months after researchers had found that both these propositions were false.
Not clear which two months was meant. But surely not back to 10th November 2019?
Possibly the tweet which reported the Chinese research?
But through the rest of January there was increasing concern and evidence of human to human transmission in WHO publications.
Adding link:
Listings of WHO's response to COVID-19
Read and search listings of how WHO has responded to the COVID-19 since 31 December 2019, including monthly numbers on press and member state briefings, expert networks, candidate vaccines and training.www.who.int
The first point in the 10th. January was that the initial paragraphs were sketching the known facts from 31st December, and by that stage nobody had died. The review basically said we don't yet know the mode of transmission. No care worker has yet fallen ill, so human to human transmission is not yet proven. They would obviously have been looking for parasites or gas leaks as well. By 24th January they were saying that person to person transmission was occurring because health personnel had become infected. What they were still coming to grips with was "When" was the person infective...Even 16 days later, 31 January, the Australian CMO would not accept that people were infective BEFORE symptoms
