logo
Failed plastics negotiations in Geneva leave the world few options to confront growing pollution crisis

Failed plastics negotiations in Geneva leave the world few options to confront growing pollution crisis

The Stara day ago
GENEVA (AP): Negotiations to reach a major treaty to end growing plastic pollution around the world fell apart on Friday, with delegates in Switzerland adjourning with no immediate plans to resume.
The consequence of the failed talks is devastating, as it leaves no clear path for nations to collectively address the mountains of plastic that are filling landfills, clogging oceans and showing up in chunks on beaches and other public places.
"Consensus is dead,' Bjorn Beeler, international coordinator for the International Pollutants Elimination Network, upon adjournment.
Every year, the world makes more than 400 million tons of new plastic, and that could grow by about 70% by 2040 without policy changes. About 100 countries want to limit production. Many have said it's also essential to address toxic chemicals used to make plastics.
The final decision, or lack there of, underscored the influence of the United States and other oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia, which opposed any limit on the productions of plastics, made mostly from fuels like oil and gas.
Nations had worked for 11 days at the United Nations office in Geneva. But they were deadlocked over whether the treaty should reduce exponential growth of plastic production and put global, legally binding controls on toxic chemicals used to make plastics.
Environmentalists, waste pickers and Indigenous leaders and many business executives traveled to the talks to make their voices heard. Indigenous leaders sought a treaty that recognizes their rights and knowledge.
The Youth Plastic Action Network was the only organization that spoke at the closing meeting Friday. Comments from observers were cut off at the request of the U.S. and Kuwait after 24 hours of meetings and negotiating.
After the adjornment, some delegates tried to put a good face on the negotiations and expressed hope for future talks. Delegates did agree they would meet again at some point in the future.
Inger Andersen, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme, said despite challenges, despite the disappointment, "we have to accept that significant progress was made.'
This process won't stop, she said, but it's too soon to say how long it will take to get a treaty now.
The negotiations were supposed to be the last round and produce the first legally binding treaty on plastic pollution, including in the oceans. But just like at the meeting in South Korea last year, the talks ended with no agreement.
Luis Vayas Valdivieso, the chair of the negotiating committee, wrote and presented two drafts of treaty text in Geneva based on the views expressed by the nations. The representatives from 184 countries did not agree to use either one as the basis for their negotiations.
Valdivieso said Friday morning as the delegates reconvened in the assembly hall that no further action was being proposed at this stage on the latest draft.
After a three-hour meeting, he banged a gavel made of recycled plastic bottle tops from a Nairobi landfill, one of many symbols of the plastic problem that were visible during the talks.
European Commissioner Jessika Roswall said the European Union and its member states had higher expectations for this meeting and while the draft falls short on their demands, it's a good basis for another negotiating session.
"The Earth is not ours only. We are stewards for those who come after us. Let us fulfill that duty,' she said.
Representatives of Norway, Australia, Tuvalu and others nations said they were "deeply disappointed' to be leaving Geneva without a treaty. Madagascar's representative said the world is "expecting action, not reports from us.'
China's delegation said the fight against plastic pollution is a long marathon and that this temporary setback is a new starting point to forge consensus.
For any proposal to make it into the treaty, every nation must agree. India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, Vietnam and others have said that consensus is vital to an effective treaty. Some countries want to change the process so decisions may be made by a vote if necessary.
Graham Forbes, head of the Greenpeace delegation in Geneva, urged delegates in that direction.
"We are going in circles. We cannot continue to do the same thing and expect a different result,' he said as Friday's meeting ended.
The biggest issue of the talks has been whether the treaty should impose caps on producing new plastic or focus instead on things like better design, recycling and reuse.
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the US opposed cutting plastic production or banning chemical additives in the treaty. The US supported provisions to improve waste collection and management, improve product design and drive recycling, reuse and other efforts to cut the plastic dumped into the environment.
Saudi Arabia said both drafts lacked balance, and Saudi and Kuwaiti negotiators said the latest proposal gave more weight to the views of other nations.
That draft, released early Friday, did not include a limit on plastic production, but recognized that current levels of production and consumption are "unsustainable' and global action is needed. New language had been added to say these levels exceeded current waste management capacities and are projected to increase further, "thereby necessitating a coordinated global response to halt and reverse such trends.'
The objective of the treaty was revamped to state that the accord would be based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full lifecycle of plastics. It talked about reducing plastic products containing "a chemical or chemicals of concern to human health or the environment,' as well as reducing of single-use or short-lived plastic products.
It was a much better, more ambitious text, though not perfect. Each country came to Geneva with a lot of "red lines,' said Magnus Heunicke, the Danish environment minister. Denmark holds the rotating presidency of the Council of Europe.
"To be very clear, a compromise means that we have to bend our red lines,' he said. - AP
.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Plastic pollution deal now appears adrift
Plastic pollution deal now appears adrift

New Straits Times

time2 hours ago

  • New Straits Times

Plastic pollution deal now appears adrift

THE collapse on Friday of a sixth round of UN talks aimed at curbing plastic output has dimmed hopes of tackling a key source of pollution and left many advocates of restrictions pessimistic about a global deal during the Trump administration. A three-year global push to reach a legally binding treaty to curb plastic pollution choking the oceans and harming human health now appears adrift, participants said. Many states and campaigners blamed the failure on oil-producers, including the United States, which they said hardened long-held positions and urged others to reject caps on new plastic production that would have curbed output of polymers. Debbra Cisneros, a negotiator for Panama, which supported a strong deal, said the United States, the world's number two plastics producer behind China, was less open than in previous rounds conducted under Joe Biden's administration. "This time they were just not wanting anything. So it was hard, because we always had them against us in each of the important provisions," she said at the end of the 11-day talks. Anti-plastic campaigners saw little hope for a change in Washington's position under President Donald Trump, who in February signed an executive order encouraging consumers to buy plastic drinking straws. "The mentality is different, and they want to extract more oil and gas out of the ground," said Bjorn Beeler, International Coordinator at International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN), a global network of more than 600 public-interest NGOs. The US State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment about its positions and its role in the talks. US delegate John Thompson declined to respond to questions from a Reuters reporter on the outcome. A State Department spokesperson previously said each party should take measures according to its national context, while Washington has expressed concerns that the new rules could increase the costs of all plastic products. The Trump administration has also rolled back various US climate and environmental policies that it says place too many burdens on national industry. Earlier last week, Washington also flexed its muscle in talks about another global environmental agreement when it threatened measures against states backing a proposal aimed at reducing shipping emissions. For a coalition of some 100 countries seeking an ambitious deal in Geneva, production limits are essential. Fiji's delegate Sivendra Michael likened excluding this provision to "mopping the floor without turning off the tap". For each month of delays, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) said nearly a million tonnes of plastic waste accumulates — some of which washes up on the beaches of island states. Some participants also blamed organisers, the International Negotiating Committee (INC), a UN-established body supported by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP). A low point was a formal meeting an hour before the negotiations were set to conclude at midnight on Thursday which lasted less than a minute and was then adjourned until dawn, prompting laughter and jeering from delegates. "Everyone was in shock as no one understood," said Ana Rocha, Global Plastics Policy Director for environmental group GAIA. "It's almost like they were playing with small children." France's ecology minister Agnes Pannier-Runacher called proceedings "chaotic". Asked what went wrong, INC chair Luis Vayas Valdivieso blamed the rift between countries and called the negotiations complex. "But we have advanced and that's important," he said. UN provisional rules require all states to agree — a constraint that some see as unworkable, especially under a US administration that is retreating from multilateralism. "Consensus is dead. You cannot agree a deal where all the countries who produce and export plastics and oil can decide the terms of what the deal is going to be," said IPEN's Beeler. Some delegates and campaigners suggested introducing voting to break the deadlock or even for the UN-led process to be abandoned altogether. The WWF and others called on ambitious states to pursue a separate deal, with the hope of getting plastics-producing nations on board later. Two draft deals emerged from the talks — one more ambitious than the other. Neither was adopted. It is unclear when the next meeting will take place, with states merely agreeing to reconvene at a later date.

From tariff talks to conflict resolutions: Negotiators wanted?
From tariff talks to conflict resolutions: Negotiators wanted?

The Star

time14 hours ago

  • The Star

From tariff talks to conflict resolutions: Negotiators wanted?

IN today's fragmented and divisive world, demands for skilled negotiators, those steeped in diplomacy and dialogue as statecraft, should be at a premium. After all, a perfect storm is brewing: global politics are becoming increasingly fraught, and common global issues are being weaponised. Open conflicts are flaring up in places like Europe and the Middle East, while other regions, such as East Asia, face renewed risks of unintended conflict due to miscalculations over long-standing disputes. Even South-East Asia, long marked by the absence of open conflict between Asean member states, was recently reminded of the dangers of complacency and the need to continuously nurture a culture of peace. Cross-border issues, such as the climate crisis, demand a cooperative global response, yet nations are unable to look past their immediate interests. A proverbial diplomatic traffic jam confronts us as countries scramble to reach 'a deal' to stave off tariff wars. With true statesmanship, these fraught conditions would be an ideal opportunity for diplomats and negotiators to thrive, demonstrating their unique skills in managing international relations, bridging differences and forging consensus tactfully and respectfully. Unfortunately, the opposite seems to be happening. Diplomacy is facing headwinds as countries increasingly turn inward, seemingly oblivious to the fact that national goals cannot be achieved in a vacuum. Instead, they require a keen awareness of external dynamics and how they affect a country's objectives. Furthermore, multilateral institutions are facing a critical test of their relevance and credibility. They are often seen as disconnected from shifting power dynamics. Complex issues are often oversimplified for headlines, and the popular focus on making 'deals' instead of 'agreements' highlights a short-term, transactional mindset. Do professional negotiators and diplomats matter? The work of a professional negotiator is not one-size-fits-all. Every situation is unique. The setting can vary, from bilateral to multilateral negotiations. Multilateral settings might involve a few countries, often within a region, or many countries, as seen in the United Nations system. Bridge-building efforts can also take place within countries, where the term 'dialogue' is often preferred over 'negotiation'. It is important to recognise that the resolution of internal conflicts, particularly in South-East Asia, has benefited immensely from the tactful, nuanced and calibrated skills of the region's diplomats, who are always conscious of hidden tripwires that could halt fragile dialogues. The subject matter can also vary widely, including political, security, economic, trade, finance and global cross-border issues. To add to the complexity, these subjects are often intertwined, defying clear distinctions between them and between the local, national, regional and global levels. A country's role can also differ, ranging from being a party to a dispute, a facilitator or mediator, to a strictly third-party observer focused on minimising risks and maximising opportunities. In all these different circumstances, the professional negotiator offers important, often unquantifiable, skills. First, a deep understanding of national interests is crucial. Professional negotiators have the ability to clearly identify and, if necessary, recalibrate their country's national interests on international issues. They focus on long-term interests rather than short-term, fleeting ones. Their institutional memory allows them to be alert to even the subtlest shifts that could inadvertently cause irreparable harm. Negotiators also have the capacity to take a comprehensive, unified approach. They are able to develop a whole-of-government, or even whole-of-society, approach in formulating a country's negotiating position, rather than a fragmented, 'siloed' one. This approach creates a sense of common national ownership and participation, making the country's position more resistant to the probes of other negotiating parties and ensuring the effective implementation of any agreements reached. They also possess full knowledge of their country's 'red lines' to adeptly manage changing negotiation dynamics. The real work of negotiation begins after initial positions are presented, it is more than just reading a prepared statement. Second, professional negotiators are trained to develop an acute knowledge and 'feel' of the other side's position, of their interests and objectives as well as their 'red lines'. They understand the other side's constraints and how they align or diverge from their own. This awareness is not a sign of weakness, it is crucial to ensure the most efficient (not to overpromise or over-concede for the sake of reaching agreements) and effective ('national' interest becoming synonymous with 'common' interest) attainment of the set objectives. In today's complex environment, experienced negotiators also discern wider stakeholders and their interests, even if they are not directly involved. This ensures that outcomes are supported and not contested, and that these dynamics work in their country's favour. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Third, professional negotiators have a strong appreciation for detailed preparation. They leave nothing to chance. Every step of a negotiation, no matter how small, is prepared for and, if necessary, negotiated over. The agenda, format, working methods and even seating arrangements matter and can significantly affect outcomes. Unfortunately, such attention to detail, the minutiae of a negotiation process, is sometime mistakenly viewed as archaic and overly bureaucratic. The truth is, they help draw the proverbial line in the sand, to test resolve before attention turn to the issues of substance. Finally, the experienced negotiator possesses a range of unquantifiable qualities. These include the ability to 'read the room' and sense underlying dynamics, points of convergence and the other side's readiness to compromise. They have a keen appreciation for timing, knowing when to reveal a national position or submit fresh proposals. A genuine capacity for empathy allows them to build trust and a comfort level with the other side without being co-opted. They also know how to agree to disagree respectfully, avoiding excessive celebration of gains that could burn bridges for future negotiations. An almost infinite reservoir of patience and resilience is critical in a battle of will and wit. Negotiators must not be too eager for results or fall into the trap of unilaterally set deadlines. Ultimately, since all agreements are expressed in words, experienced negotiators are wordsmiths, equipped with a command of language. They must also be seen as trustworthy, reliable and principled individuals whose words can be relied upon. In our fragmented world, the efficacy and importance of diplomacy as a means to manage relations between states should be beyond doubt. The skills of the diplomat-negotiator should be in high demand, and a surge in diplomacy is needed. — The Jakarta Post/ANN Marty Natalegawa is a former Indonesian foreign minister and founder/convenor of the Amity Circle, which focuses on the promotion of diplomacy, negotiation and dialogue.

China urges Japan to exercise caution on Yasukuni Shrine issues
China urges Japan to exercise caution on Yasukuni Shrine issues

The Star

time16 hours ago

  • The Star

China urges Japan to exercise caution on Yasukuni Shrine issues

Japanese lawmakers, led by a Liberal Democrat Ichiro Aisawa, center, leave after their prayer to the war dead the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo, as the country marks the 80th anniversary of its defeat in the World War II, Aug 15, 2025. - Photo: AP BEIJING: China urges Japan to face squarely and reflect on its history of aggression, be prudent on historical issues such as the Yasukuni Shrine, make a clean break with militarism, stick to the path of peaceful development, and earn the trust of its Asian neighbours and the international community through real actions, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said Saturday (Aug 16). The spokesperson made the remarks when asked to comment on Japanese politicians paying respects to the Yasukuni Shrine. Aug 15 marks the day of Japan's unconditional surrender in the Second World War. According to media reports, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba sent a ritual offering to the Yasukuni Shrine, and Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Shinjiro Koizumi, Minister of Finance Katsunobu Kato and rightwing politicians including Takayuki Kobayashi and Koichi Hagiuda visited the Shrine. The spokesperson said the Yasukuni Shrine is a spiritual tool and symbol of Japanese militarists' war of aggression against foreign nations, adding that the shrine honors 14 convicted Class-A war criminals who bear grave responsibilities for the war crimes committed during that war of aggression. "China strongly deplores Japan's actions that grossly challenge historical justice and human conscience. We have lodged serious protests with the Japanese side," said the spokesperson. Noting that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the victory in the Chinese People's War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War, the spokesperson said to view and treat history correctly is an important prerequisite for Japan's post-war return to the international community. It is the political foundation of Japan's relations with neighboring countries, and more importantly, a yardstick for Japan's commitment to peaceful development, the spokesperson added. - China Daily/ANN

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