WHO pandemic treaty hits snag

World Health Organization (WHO) officials have expressed disappointment that negotiations for a “pandemic treaty” have failed to meet a crucial deadline.

‘We are not where we hoped we would be’

For over two years, the WHO has been attempting to introduce a pandemic accord that it claims will “strengthen global pandemic prevention, preparedness and response to prevent a repeat of the health, social and economic impacts that were caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.” 

Last week, the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) held its ninth round of negotiations with member states to compose a final draft of the treaty. The negotiations did not meet expectations, however. WHO officials are disappointed that a final draft was not approved in time for the organization’s annual World Health Assembly in Geneva this week.

“We are not where we hoped we would be when we started this process,” INB Chairman Roland Driece told the Associated Press. Driece added that creating a pandemic treaty is crucial “for the sake of humanity.”

The WHO is also holding negotiations to amend the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) with which all member states must comply.

24 governors join opposition to pandemic treaty

There has been widespread criticism that the pandemic treaty and IHR amendments will require member states to cede sovereignty to the WHO in the event of a pandemic. 

On Wednesday, 24 Republican governors signed a letter to Joe Biden expressing concern that these two initiatives “would purport to grant the World Health Organization (WHO) unprecedented and unconstitutional powers over the United States and its people.”

“The objective of these instruments is to empower the WHO, particularly its uncontrollable Director-General, with the authority to restrict the rights of U.S. citizens, including freedoms such as speech, privacy, travel, choice of medical care, and informed consent, thus violating our Constitution’s core principles,” the governors wrote. 

They also expressed concern that the agreements currently under negotiation will transform the WHO from an advisory body to a global health authority. Under the proposed arrangements, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus would have the power to unilaterally declare a "public health emergency of international concern" (PHEIC).

“Furthermore, these instruments would erode sovereignty by granting the WHO’s DirectorGeneral [sic] the authority to dictate responses to a declared PHEIC, stripping elected representatives of their role in setting public health policies and compelling citizens to comply with WHO directives, potentially including mandates regarding medical treatments,” the letter continued.

What does the agreement say?

Indeed, recent drafts of the pandemic treaty would crack down on taxpayers who disobey mandates, among other measures.

In Article 18 of the draft, the WHO clarifies that governments must promote “pandemic literacy” — a strategy which, like media literacy, tells the public who to trust and suppresses “misinformation.”

“The Parties shall strengthen science, public health and pandemic literacy in the population, as well as access to information on pandemics and their effects and drivers, and combat false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through effective international collaboration and cooperation as referred to in Article 16 herein,” the agreement states.

In addition, governments should craft policies that will quash noncompliance with “public health and social measures” and enforce “trust in science and public health institutions.”

“The Parties shall, as appropriate, conduct research and inform policies on factors that hinder adherence to public health and social measures in a pandemic and trust in science and public health institutions,” says the document.

Member states are also instructed to rope in the private sector for pandemic-related activities. 

Other provisions in the agreement require governments to take an authoritarian approach to pandemics that go beyond mere regulations and extend to social engineering. In Article 17, for example, governments must not only develop public health policies but also “social policies” aimed at “mobilizing social capital in communities for mutual support.”

A pretense to prescribe global policies?

The WHO would also be able to use public health as a pretext to dictate global policy. In one clause, for example, the WHO demands that governments “encourage ceasefires in affected countries during pandemics to promote global cooperation against common global threats.” In another clause, countries must enforce “gender equality” and place more women in leadership positions to create a proper “health and care workforce.”

Governments would be permitted to withdraw from the pandemic agreement only after waiting two years after signing it, following which the agreement will still remain in effect for that nation for another year as the withdrawal does not take effect immediately.

During that time, the WHO can declare a pandemic at any time and for any reason. Such reasons might include a virus like COVID-19, a social condition like loneliness, or a phenomenon like “climate change.”