“Unhindered” Access in Global Health Negotiations: Navigating the Intersection of Sanctions and Humanitarian Imperatives

Newsletter Edition #114 [Treaty Talks]

Hi,

Like life, in law, sometimes, a lot hinges on a single word. And yet of course, there is much more to it than the word itself.

In today’s edition, we examine the word “Unhindered” access in the context of ensuring that medical services, products reach vulnerable populations in conflict settings, sanctioned countries during health emergencies. This has divided countries, like few other contentious issues in the Pandemic Agreement. And it will not go away.

An estimated 300 million people are affected globally by sanctions, diplomats tell us.

As WHO member states gather next week once again to resume negotiations towards a Pandemic Agreement, this and other issues will come to the forefront.

My colleague Nishant presents an overview of the evolution of the challenge to hindered access. We also supplement this with what negotiators share with us on this very sensitive and crucial matter.

This brings attention to the forgotten populations in vulnerable settings all over the world, who do not dominate policy discussions as much as they should, in the sterilized spaces of global health Geneva.

Thank you for reading.

---

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!

Priti

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

---

Illustration Credit: Amy Clarke, Chembe Collaborative

I. GHF ANALYSIS

“Unhindered” Access in Global Health Negotiations: Navigating the Intersection of Sanctions and Humanitarian Imperatives

By Nishant Sirohi & Priti Patnaik

---

WHO member states remain painfully divided on whether vulnerable populations in humanitarian settings, and in sanctioned countries should have “unhindered” access to medical services and products during health emergencies and pandemics.

The draft text of the Pandemic Agreement references the term “unhindered”, which is a continues to be a major flashpoint in the negotiations.

While the debate around “unhindered” has long occupied negotiators over the years across policy forums in Geneva and in New York, in the context of a new Pandemic Agreement, this discussion is reaching a crucial juncture, potentially also poised for an eventual trade-off with other competing interests in the negotiations.

At the heart of the debate lies a critical question: Should sanctions-hit countries be guaranteed access to medical products during public health emergencies? As the world grapples with increasingly frequent and severe health crises, this debate underscores the complex interplay between public health, international law, and global politics. While the term ‘unhindered access’ seeks to uphold the universal humanitarian goal of equitable medical supply distribution, its intersection with geopolitics – particularly Unilateral Coercive Measures (UCMs) – has turned this universal humanitarian imperative into a contentious point of negotiation.

Negotiators say, that the impact of sanctions on populations is significant and widespread: more than one in four countries are subject to sanctions by the UN or Western governments. Currently, 29 percent of global GDP is produced in sanctioned countries, up from only 4 percent in the 1960s. Sanctions have been imposed on 98 less- and least-developed countries, affecting millions of people in these nations. Entire regions have been impacted, including Africa, the Arab world, the Caribbean, parts of Asia, and some of Latin America. With over 300 million people affected globally by sanctions, it is clear that their reach impacts hundreds of millions, with particularly severe consequences for populations in developing countries and vulnerable groups within those societies.

In this story, we first examine the historical context, and then look at the state of play around this discussion in the Pandemic Agreement.

Image Credit: Photo by Alfo Medeiros, Pexels