YAY! The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty: No agreement, no special WHA session next month, negotiations continue until next May
And if there is no agreement by end May it dies. Or we get a meaningless treaty. Or we leave WHO.
MERYL NASS
According to Health Policy Watch, a decision had to be made by tomorrow on whether a December WHA meeting would be called. That is why today’s press conference of 30 minutes was held: to notify everyone it is off the table. The author says the Africa Group and the US (Obama’s classmate Pamela Hamamoto) were pushing for the meeting next month. Africa may have seen it as their last opportunity to get a good deal.
One International Negotiating Body co-chair was replaced after the May 2024 meeting with Swiss Ambassador Anne-Claire Ambrou, and the other with Dr. Precious Matsoso, who has been a co-chair for the IHR amendments. Bringing in the women didn’t break the logjam. “Stakeholders” (we know what that means) were invited into the negotiations this past week, every day from Tuesday through Friday and then again today, to try and speed things along. That did not work either. They are running out of tricks.
How about a watered down agreement?
At a stakeholder briefing last week, the INB Bureau stressed that they are aiming for a document that can grow in the future – in other words, what commentators have described as a pandemic agreement “lite” that can provide the framework for more detailed plans about contentious issues such as the proposed pathogen access and benefit-sharing (PABS) system.
Precious Matsoso got us prepped for failure, explaining that the 2 years and 9 months so far spent on the Pandemic Treaty is really a very short time, as treaties go.
While Steve Solomon, Amb. Amprou and Dr. Matsoso all came in with big smiles, they quickly reverted to frowns when the first journalist, from Agence France Presse asked how the US election had affected the negotiations. Naturally, the journalist got a non-answer.
Here is what Spark Street Advisers, a PR cheerleader and stakeholder for the Treaty, told negotiators last week, also a good sign:
Over the course of the negotiations, there have been numerous attempts to include strong accountability language on monitoring and compliance, and mechanisms within the agreement to ensure whatever is agreed to here is carried out. As we’ve gone along, nearly all of those have been removed.
Compliance, however, remains key to making sure the principles discussed here and agreed to by states over these past three years – are respected and implemented.
That is why we would encourage member states to consider and strengthen the Bureau text (2bis), establishing an independent monitoring committee for the implementation of the Pandemic Agreement, reporting to the Conference of Parties. Independent oversight is fundamental to a treaty’s effectiveness. The monitoring committee would regularly review state compliance with agreed-upon provisions of the Agreement. It would also consider information from non-state actors, including the UN and NGOs. Finally, the Committee reports would also be publicly available to promote transparency and accountability.
The nations don’t want to take this exercise seriously; they don’t want to be monitored and be forced to comply.
What we were told today, which we already knew, is that Articles 4, 11 and 12 are still problematic. Good. I think that by revealing what this foul agreement is really about, we helped put a stake in its heart. So much for those stakeholders! Time to celebrate!
We are hopefully at the beginning of the end of the pandemic preparedenss agenda. Next we end all research that can be put to offensive uses, everywhere.
This article (YAY! The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty: No agreement, no special WHA session next month, negotiations continue until next May) was created and published by Meryl’s CHAOS Newsletter and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Meryl Nass
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply