World Avoids Disastrous “Pandemic Treaty” – For Now

Despite the best efforts of World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, negotiations over a so-called “pandemic treaty” that would see the United States cede significant authority over public health policy to the WHO appear to have reached a stalemate. But WHO representatives are nonetheless pressing forward with other alarming proposals that would similarly strip American voters of their constitutional right to self-government.

Ghebreyesus had previously set the start of this year’s World Health Assembly, the annual decision-making forum for the WHO, which began on Monday, as the deadline for reaching an agreement which would grant the WHO unprecedented power in setting public health policy in member nations during a pandemic. But as the meetings convened this week, negotiators failed to iron out disputes over access to vaccines and intellectual property.

While WHO bureaucrats bemoaned the missed deadline, Americans concerned about the rising power of unelected global governing bodies have reason to celebrate.

As critics have pointed out, far from granting the WHO more power, the organization’s glaring failures during the pandemic should warrant investigations and serious conversations about the authority the WHO currently has.

In the early days of the WHO’s existence following its founding as part of the United Nations in 1948, it proved highly effective at eradicating diseases like smallpox and polio. But in recent years, bureaucratic excess, unwarranted centralization of power, and ideological capture by the left have rendered it not only ineffective but detrimental to the mission of public health.

The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare these critical weaknesses, as the WHO was exposed for bowing to the wishes of the Chinese Communist Party by initially discounting the severity of the virus outbreak and then discrediting the lab leak theory – a theory that has since been proven not only possible but likely. The WHO also promoted strict lockdowns, pointing to China as a model, which crushed the global economy and destroyed countless lives and livelihoods.

Instead of reflecting on these disastrous policies, soon after the pandemic subsided, the WHO began pursuing the idea of an international agreement – a pandemic treaty – which would supposedly help better prepare the world for the next pandemic.

The pandemic treaty would have created a massive new bureaucracy funded by WHO member states but unaccountable to voters in those countries. Far from a democratic system, it would resemble a socialist institution with one leader at the top – the WHO Director-General – having the final say over everything.

As AMAC Newsline has previously reported, the pandemic treaty would effectively have transformed the WHO “from an advisory council into a governing body with legal power to determine domestic policies.”

The WHO Director-General would, if the treaty were in place, be responsible for overseeing the transfer of proprietary medical technologies from one country to another in the event of a “potential” or “intermediate” public health emergency. He would also be in charge of directing the global supply chain for “pandemic products” – in effect creating a global socialist command economy whenever the WHO declares something to be a “health emergency.”

In Article 18 of the latest draft treaty, the WHO also lays the foundation for what is effectively a new worldwide system of censorship and propaganda. It gives the WHO power to dictate to world governments how to stifle free speech by “countering” dissenting views by labeling them “misinformation” or “disinformation.”

The draft treaty also mentions “finances” or “financing” 38 times – a reflection of just how much the treaty will cost taxpayers primarily in wealthy nations like the United States, all without voters getting a chance to weigh in on the treaty’s provisions.

Perhaps most egregiously, the treaty would require U.S. companies to hand over 20 percent of their medical supplies in the event of another pandemic – a provision which, if it were in place in 2020, would’ve cost many American lives. The U.S. would be forced to prioritize residents of other countries over its own citizens.

President Joe Biden has repeatedly indicated his support for the treaty, even suggesting that he would be willing to enforce it without a vote in the U.S. Senate.

Retired lawyer Professor Gerrit Hoedemakers, who advised the Dutch Health Ministry in the early 1990s, described the draft treaty as “a cross between Orwell’s 1984 and Thomas More’s Utopia.” He expressed concern about the broad powers it outlines, leaving the WHO as the sole authority on certain issues at times. “The gaps left for interpretation make it even more dangerous,” he said.

Dr. Dominique Alyea, a former French official who cooperated closely with WHO during the late 1980s, told me that the WHO has already far overstepped its mission as outlined in the U.N. Charter. “Imagine a colossal, overweight pig that’s wedged in the entrance of a saloon,” he vividly described. “Pushing it forward would cause significant damage to the room it doesn’t fit in, and pulling it backward could lead to the collapse of the entrance.”

Instead, he said, the only way to solve the problem is to “put the monster on a diet” – in this case reducing the bureaucratic bloat that already exists at the WHO. “Once it acquires an appropriate size, you can easily kick it back,” he concluded.

The apparent failure of the pandemic treaty is one positive step in this direction – but it is only a temporary victory.

Ghebreyesus and other WHO leaders are already attempting to enact the same policies outlined in the pandemic treaty through updates to the International Health Regulations (IHR). Talks on this front are reportedly advancing much more quickly.

Any agreement will undoubtedly require the buy-in of the United States to have any legitimacy and effectiveness on a global level. Biden has made clear that he is willing to abide by whatever the WHO decides. Without a change in leadership, the democratic power of the American people during the next public health crisis may be at stake.

Ben Solis is the pen name of an international affairs journalist, historian, and researcher.