WHO: I told you we had kneecapped the attempt to take over global health, and this report of the first pandemic treaty negotiators' meetings suggests the same

Even after they swapped out the old negotiators for more pliable ones. We exposed their game. They don't get a new world public health order

Tense Discussions On Process & Way Forward: Pandemic Agreement Talks Set For An Uphill Climb to Consensus

This was supposed to be a “reset”. When WHO member states met this week for the tenth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, it was expected that they would analyse lessons learned from over two years of negotiations towards a new Pandemic Agreement and chart a way ahead to conclude these discussions.

While they had extensive discussions over two days along painfully familiar lines, it does not appear to be a reset in the process. Key areas of disagreement on the involvement of experts in these negotiations, and the nature of informal sessions, bogged down these discussions – concerns that have been repeatedly raised over the last two years.

After a somewhat optimistic start to the meeting when negotiators and key stakeholders were eager to make a fresh start, familiar arguments showed continued distrust among countries. This quickly came to the surface in the course of this meeting. Undoubtedly, countries are still basking in the success of reaching consensus on the amendments to the International Health Regulations, an event that took place less than two months ago, but has already become distant memory.

Countries have no time to rest on their laurels. It appeared as if the recent success [some success—that was a charade that no one wants to admit—Nass] on the IHR, has already dimmed relative to the enormity of the task ahead of countries in concluding these tricky negotiations on the Pandemic Agreement.

While the positive momentum generated by the IHR track of negotiations will surely spill over into the negotiations for a Pandemic Agreement, the gulf that countries would need to bridge on reaching consensus also became obvious. As many as 20 articles are still open – which also happen to be the toughest topics on the table.

To be sure, it is not only the substantive matters that pose a challenge in reaching consensus, it is also process concerns that continue to plague countries. Only a few countries made clear statements seeking a course correction in process in order to reach consensus. Most statements were couched in delicate diplomatic language. Some observers were of the view that the meeting did not go far enough to really reset the process. This brings into question how different will the coming months be in terms of what has already been tried at the INB in a bid to get countries closer to agreement…