logo
Exclusive: Trump administration memo urges countries to reject plastic production caps in UN Treaty

Exclusive: Trump administration memo urges countries to reject plastic production caps in UN Treaty

Reutersa day ago
GENEVA/WASHINGTON, Aug 6 (Reuters) - The United States has sent letters to at least a handful of countries urging them to reject the goal of a global pact that includes limits on plastic production and plastic chemical additives at the start of U.N. plastic treaty talks in Geneva, according to a memo and communications seen by Reuters.
In the communications dated July 25 and circulated to countries at the start of negotiations on Monday, the U.S. laid out its red lines for negotiations that put it in direct opposition to over 100 countries that have supported those measures.
Hopes for a "last-chance" ambitious global treaty that tackles the full life cycle of plastic pollution from the production of polymers to the disposal of waste have dimmed as delegates gather for what was intended to be the final round of negotiations.
Significant divisions remain between oil-producing countries— who oppose caps on virgin plastic production fueled by petroleum, coal, and gas — and parties such as the European Union and small island states, which advocate for limits, as well as stronger management of plastic products and hazardous chemicals.
The U.S. delegation, led by career State Department officials who had represented the Biden administration, sent memos to countries laying out its position and saying it will not agree to a treaty that tackles the upstream of plastic pollution.
"We will not support impractical global approaches such as plastic production targets or bans and restrictions on plastic additives or plastic products - that will increase the costs of all plastic products that are used throughout our daily lives," said the memo Reuters understands was sent to countries who could not be named due to sensitivities around the negotiations.
The U.S. acknowledged in the memo that after attending a preliminary heads of delegation meeting in Nairobi from June 30 to July 2, "we plainly do not see convergence on provisions related to the supply of plastic, plastic production, plastic additives or global bans and restrictions on products and chemicals, also known as the global list".
A State Department spokesperson told Reuters each Party should take measures according to its national context.
"Some countries may choose to undertake bans, while others may want to focus on improved collection and recycling," the spokesperson said.
John Hocevar, Oceans Campaign Director for Greenpeace USA, said the U.S. delegation's tactics under Trump marked a "return to old school bullying from the U.S. Government trying to use its financial prowess to convince governments to change their position in a way that benefits what the U.S. wants".
One of the world's leading producers of plastics, the U.S. has also proposed revising the draft objective of the treaty to reduce plastic pollution by eliminating a reference to an agreed "approach that addresses the full life cycle of plastics", in a proposed resolution seen by Reuters.
A source familiar with the negotiations told Reuters it indicated that the U.S. is seeking to roll back language that had been agreed in 2022 to renegotiate the mandate for the Treaty.
The U.S. stance broadly aligns with the positions laid out by the global petrochemicals industry, which stated similar positions ahead of the talks, and a number of powerful oil and petrochemical producer countries that have held this position throughout the negotiations.
Over 100 countries have backed a cap on global plastic production.
In the U.S., the Trump administration has numerous measures to roll back climate and environmental policies that it says place too many burdens on industry.
Plastic production is set to triple by 2060 without intervention, choking oceans, harming human health and accelerating climate change, according to the OECD.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump announces 100% tariff on computer chips, sparking electronics price hike fears
Trump announces 100% tariff on computer chips, sparking electronics price hike fears

The Independent

time11 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Trump announces 100% tariff on computer chips, sparking electronics price hike fears

President Donald Trump has announced plans to impose a 100 per cent tariff on all foreign computer chips entering the United States. The levy was revealed during a meeting with Apple CEO Tim Cook in the Oval Office. It is expected to increase the cost of electronic goods and household appliances and will apply to all countries. However, companies that have committed to or are currently building chip manufacturing facilities within the US will be exempt from the tariff. Watch the video in full above.

A Trump-Putin summit will be as useful to Ukraine and democracy as Agent Orange is for gardening
A Trump-Putin summit will be as useful to Ukraine and democracy as Agent Orange is for gardening

The Independent

time11 minutes ago

  • The Independent

A Trump-Putin summit will be as useful to Ukraine and democracy as Agent Orange is for gardening

A long overdue summit between the Presidents of the United States and the Russian Federation to discuss peace in Ukraine, where nuclear war has been threatened, must be seen as an historic moment for optimism. Except that from London to Langley, Berlin, Canberra and Tokyo, intelligence chiefs will be on tenterhooks wondering if this is another occasion that looks like the meeting between an agent and his handler. There's no evidence that Donald Trump works for Vladimir Putin. But there is ample evidence that the US president favours Putin's agenda. And that he has done all he can to hobble Ukraine while it defends itself against a Russian invasion of Europe's eastern flank. The summit was announced, significantly, by the Kremlin first. It may be held in the United Arab Emirates, which has been pursuing a 'friends with all, enemies of none' foreign policy. That would be apt; a summit held in a mostly benign authoritarian state between a malevolent leader of a brutal authoritarian state and his greatest admirer, who happens to lead the world's most powerful democracy. Trump has done some performative pouting and sounded peevish about Putin recently. He has been humiliated by the Russian president's indifference to his pleas to agree a ceasefire in Ukraine. This has provoked the leader of the free world to accuse its most dangerous challenger of 'bulls***' and to threaten largely toothless sanctions against the Kremlin. Earlier this year Trump. took a very different tone with Ukraine – a pro-western democracy on track to joining the European Union and hoping to become part of Nato. Trump cut weapons supplies to Kyiv. He blinded the US intelligence feed to Ukraine during the Russian counter-offensive to retake territory in Kursk. He publicly insulted Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky accusing him of risking World War III. He held Zelensky's feet to the fire to get a colonial-style mineral deal to pay for weapons that had been free. Trump also took Russia's side in every aspect of how he thought Ukraine should capitulate to Moscow in future peace talks. Putin is obsessed with returning Ukraine to the former Russian (or Soviet) empire. He has never hidden his ambition to do so and consistently denies that Ukraine is really an independent entity at all. He is also a former KBG agent, an expert at manipulation, who genuinely believes that 'the west' is plotting against Moscow, whatever ideology dominates the Kremlin. He ordered Russian intelligence services to interfere in the 2016 US elections, to undermine the very notion of truth in the western media, and has been delighted by Brexit as it weakens the perceived threat of the EU. In the US, Trump has further empowered Russia by his assault on the independence of the judiciary, his flouting of democratic conventions, the enrichment of his family through his presidency and the widespread spectacle of ICE arrests by masked police. A weakened American democracy in crisis is a victory for Putin – and it's been delivered by Trump. As The Independent has reported before, the Five Eyes intelligence network that links the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand is under strain because the agencies using the network do not trust Trump with their secrets – he has a record of blurting them out and of storing confidential material in his toilet. When he met Putin for his first summit in Helsinki in July 2018 he did so for more than two hours with only a US translator in the room with him and the Russian delegation. He snatched away the translator's notes after the meeting. Then, when asked if he agreed with US intelligence assessments that Russia has interfered with the US elections he said 'no'. 'President Putin says it's not Russia. I don't see any reason why it would be," he insisted. The remark was condemned by Republican grandees from then US House speaker Paul Ryan and senator John McCain, among many others. 'No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant,' McCain said after the Helsinki summit. Most of Trump's face-to-face meetings with Putin have not been properly recorded and have often been held without the usual presence of White House aids and officials. And every time they meet, Trump has emerged apparently dazzled and fulsome in his praise for the leader of a regime that kills its political opponents in jail, tosses critics off balconies and uses nerve gas and radioactive poisons to bump off defectors to Britain. There is every chance that Trump will continue to take Russia's side against Ukraine in a summit with Putin. The bilateral sanctions he's threatened will make no difference to Russia, which now has negligible trade with the US. His 'tertiary' sanctions against India, which has been hit with a 25 per cent surge in tariffs because it imports Russian oil, are unlikely to be imposed or if they are they will be short lived. Trump needs India inside his tent. Trump has not threatened to renew arms shipments to Ukraine. He has not said he might reconsider the Nato/Ukraine request for American troops to help guarantee a future peace deal. He's granted tiny exports of enough Patriot air defence missile for Kyiv for about one night's Russian bombardment. Trump has caused turmoil in Nato more widely. The leaders of the alliance no longer see the US as a reliable ally – let alone the cornerstone of a military construct that has protected western democracy for six decades. Trump's relationship with Putin has been toxic for the West, for Europe and is stripping the branches of democracy like Agent Orange.

Could Trump tariffs become BRIC-building blocks?
Could Trump tariffs become BRIC-building blocks?

Reuters

time11 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Could Trump tariffs become BRIC-building blocks?

ORLANDO, Florida, Aug 7 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump has the so-called 'BRIC' group of nations directly in his trade war crosshairs, slapping super-high tariffs on imports from Brazil and India, and accusing them of pursuing "anti-American" policies. Washington's relations with Brasilia and New Delhi have sunk to new lows. But this belligerence could backfire. The White House said on Wednesday that it will impose an additional 25% tariff on goods from India, citing New Delhi's continued imports of Russian oil. That brings the levy on most goods to 50%, among the highest rate faced by any U.S. trading partner. Brazil also faces 50% tariffs on many of its U.S.-bound exports, not because of trade imbalances, but because of Trump's anger at what he calls a "witch hunt" against his ally, Brazil's former President Jair Bolsonaro, who has been charged with plotting a coup following his election loss in 2022. This breakdown in relations could be Trump's intention: push these countries to the brink so that they'll agree to trade deals that are heavily lopsided in Washington's favor. That strategy seemed to work with Japan and the European Union. But hitting these 'BRICS' economies with eye-watering tariffs could push them closer together, strengthening the resolve of a group that appeared to be losing whatever momentum, purpose and unity it had. The original BRIC nations - Brazil, Russia, India and China - held their first summit in 2009, eight years after former Goldman Sachs economist Jim O'Neill coined the acronym for this group of emerging economies he said would challenge the G7 group of rich countries in the future. South Africa became the 'S' in BRICS two years later, and the club now comprises 11 countries including Indonesia, Iran and Saudi Arabia, as well as a further nine 'partner' countries including Malaysia, Nigeria, and Thailand. It was always a disparate group - geographically, economically, culturally, and politically - meaning its cohesiveness has always been questionable. Its relations have sometimes been rocky, particularly among its largest members. That's why it was so notable when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday announced that he will visit China for the first time in over seven years. This could be a sign that rising tensions with Washington are helping to thaw frosty ties between New Delhi and Beijing. Also on Wednesday, Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told Reuters that he plans to call the leaders of India and China to discuss a joint BRICS response to Trump's tariffs. "I'm going to try to discuss with them about how each one is doing in this situation ... so we can make a decision," Lula said. "It's important to remember that the BRICS have ten countries at the G20," he added, referring to the group that gathers 20 of the world's biggest economies. While nothing unites like a common enemy, the differences between the BRICS countries could limit how solid that front can actually be. Stephen Jen, CEO and co-CIO of Eurizon SLJ Asset Management in London, posits that trade links between the five core BRICS nations - never mind the historical, political and cultural ties - are weak. Only 14% of their trade is with each other. Russia and Brazil may have higher levels of intra-BRICS trade, but only 9% of China's exports are BRICS-bound, significantly less than the 19% that goes to emerging Asia and 15% destined for the U.S. And in economic, political and military terms, China matters far more than the others on the global stage. "BRICS is more of an alliance on paper, not in reality," Jen says. But there are signs that intra-BRICS trade is strengthening. China-Russia trade was a record $244.8 billion last year, and China and India are the biggest two buyers of Russian oil. China is Brazil's largest trading partner, accounting for 28% of Brazil's exports and 24% of its imports. Roughly 70% of China's soybean imports are from Brazil. Trump's tariffs could push BRICS countries closer together in the near term, in areas such as trade, investment, and currency usage. They may feel it's in their economic interests and, for some, in their political interests, to present a united front. How long that front can hold is anyone's guess. These countries, particularly India, may resist moving further under China's influence, and Russia's pariah status could limit further integration beyond commodity imports. In the meantime, however, Trump's tariff salvos are BRICS-bound. How these emerging economies respond could be an indication of whether we may truly be seeing a reshuffling of global alliances. (The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store