Regressive Politics on Climate & Gender, Crash Against WHO’s Gates, Impinging on Global Health Policy Space [EB154]

Newsletter Edition #210 [The Files In-Depth]

Hi,

It is a sign of things to come.

Polarization along on the great divisive markers of our times on climate, gender and geopolitics is ripping through WHO’s delicate work on global health – as countries bring domestic politics to Geneva.

In this edition, we try to capture the writing on the wall that is emerging from the week-long discussions at WHO’s executive board meeting that concludes today.

From walking away on agreed negotiated language around climate change, to raising fundamental questions on women’s sexual and reproductive rights, WHO member states are regressing from hard won battles.

These unfortunate efforts to globalize insecurities, harms women and girls everywhere, and hurts multilateralism in global health. That in 2024, some WHO member states are negotiating whether women have rights to their bodies is telling.

As this week’s discussions show, political and commercial forces are cramping the progressive global health agenda. And as a result, are in direct conflict with WHO’s technical mandate and what it really stands for.

---

If you find our work valuable, become a paying subscriber. Tracking global health policy-making in Geneva is tough and expensive. Help us in raising important questions, and in keeping an ear to the ground. Readers paying for our work helps us meet our costs.

Our gratitude to our subscribers who ensure we stay in the game!

---

Until later.

Best,

Priti

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

---

I. UPDATE: WHO EB154

Regressive Politics on Climate & Gender, Crash Against WHO’s Gates, Impinging on Global Health Policy Space

Culture wars have made home at World Health Organization.

It has been a week marked with regression, on several fronts from gender issues to climate change. At the 154^th Executive Board meeting, WHO member states made clear that they will not shy away from walking back from established principles on rights and responsibilities -  a bid that is making global health more insular.

Some stakeholders say that this insistence on renegotiating everything from ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities’ in the context of climate discussions, to what “gender-responsive” really means, is stalling agenda and discussions on a range of issues from financing, meeting with natural disasters, or even merely deciding who gets to sit around the table.

Apart from domestic political agenda driving some of these reservations, there is another subtext to these discussions. Several diplomats told Geneva Health Files, that countries are cautious and guarded about the language they agree in resolutions at WHO, for the fear of the implications it could have on the pandemic treaty negotiations, and those to amend the International Health Regulations. This is particularly true with respect to the climate related discussions at WHO.

In a statement earlier in the week, Germany said, “…we have negotiated many important resolutions for the EB that will improve health. However, we are highly concerned that it seems to become more and more difficult to find consensus regarding already agreed language and technical resolutions. This has direct implications on health and our guiding principle of leaving no one behind.”

Countries such as Egypt said, “…We call on the WHO to remain sensitive to Member States’ positions on controversial and divisive concepts. Our shared objective should be to enhance ownership of WHO activities and broaden the scope of Member State engagement. It is important to take into consideration the national and cultural sensitivities of all Member States…”

By raising fundamental questions about WHO’s mandate, some member states also expressed concerns on the implications for governance, and cutting into the space that the Secretariat has in implementing negotiated and agreed processes such as on the Framework of Engagement with Non-State Actors. 

This story specifically looks at how climate and gender where treated across certain decisions and resolutions that were taken up, but have been shelved for future discussions pending consensus among countries. We also share verbatim statements from member states for the sake of posterity. For this story we spoke with numerous diplomatic sources and other experts in the course of the meeting this week.

Image Credit: Photo by Phil Kallahar, Pexels