Negotiating Text for Pandemic Agreement Gets Panned by Developed Countries, Stage Set For Tough Fight

Newsletter Edition #74 [Treaty Talks]

Hi,

Is the glass half full or half empty? The way this question is answered will depend on where one stands. In any case, persuasion is key in getting the other side to see your point of view.

The process to negotiate a new Pandemic Agreement is increasingly looking like an unhappy marriage - with either sides unable to persuade the other.

The ninth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body was characterised by stark differences in positions and strong undercurrents. The tension is palpable, and the atmosphere taut.

But like any shrink on the street will tell you, that most things can be fixed. The name of the game is “compromise”, to save this marriage at all costs. Hard to predict, but if countries want they will make this work. And if they decide to walk away from this arrangement, tough luck.

In our story today, we analyse opening statements by countries, and also supplement it with fluid feedback from negotiators during this ongoing closed-door process. My colleague Nishant has, overnight, put together upwards of 25 country statements for your reference.

Also a point of clarification: we are not into “solutions journalism”, we have to say what we see. Only accurate information will contribute towards accountability. This might lead to solutions, or not. We are merely doing our job.

Support public interest global health journalism, become a paying subscriber. Tracking global health policy-making in Geneva is tough and expensive. Help us raise important questions, and in keeping an ear to the ground. Readers paying for our work makes this possible.

Our gratitude to our subscribers who help us stay in the game!

Thank you for reading.

Until later.

Best,

Priti

Feel free to write to us: patnaik.reporting@gmail.com. Follow us on X: @filesgeneva

---

Illustration Credit: Amy Clarke, Chembe Collaborative

I. ANALYSIS: INB9

Negotiating Text for Pandemic Agreement Gets Panned by Developed Countries, Stage Set For Tough Fight

By Priti Patnaik & Nishant Sirohi

In what could be the final meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, a process set up to establish a new pandemic instrument, WHO member states were told off by Co-Chair Precious Matsoso to “not chicken out at the start of the negotiations”, reminding them that all countries had agreed that addressing “equity” in pandemic prevention, response is important.

The opening of the meeting that was webcast, was emblematic of the inherent tensions that have underpinned this two-year old process, now coming to a head with just days remaining to conclude the negotiations.

The good news is that considering that countries have spent months working on the toughest provisions means that there is an understanding on positions and the current negotiating text largely reflects a balance of interests, many stakeholders are of the view.

The bad news is that, the risk of a watered down agreement driven by the sheer need to reach consensus has never been higher.

One of the potential outcomes of not reaching an agreement is not ruled out, if countries believe that what will finally be negotiated is not useful to their constituencies back home.

So here is where things stand now: the Bureau came up with a negotiating text. Developing countries have largely welcomed it, developed countries uniformly criticised it [see most country statements below]. There is a general disagreement on the modalities for the conduct of these negotiations in this final stretch. (see primer from earlier in the week). Something is got to give over the coming days if countries are serious about pulling this off in a matter of weeks.

In this story we analyse country statements that clearly reflect determination, but also limitations of these aspirations when faced with hard political realities. We also present concerns shared by negotiators on process, that is making these negotiations harder.    

Image Credit: Photo by Engin Akyurt, Pexels