UN plastics treaty talks collapse
The 'hard-fought' negotiations to develop a landmark United Nations treaty to
'This has been a hard-fought 10 days against the backdrop of geopolitical complexities, economic challenges and multilateral strains,'
'However, one thing remains clear: despite these complexities, all countries want to remain at the table. While we did not land the treaty text we hoped for, we at Unep will continue the work against plastic pollution — pollution that is in our groundwater, in our soil, in our rivers, in our oceans and, yes, in our bodies.'
South Africa's department of forestry, fisheries and the environment said the talks had collapsed because of 'deep divisions between nations and the absence of a clear process to resolve the deadlock'.
'South Africa is disappointed by the outcome and concerned about the procedural failings that stalled progress. But our resolve remains unshaken. While the lack of agreement is frustrating, South Africa will not waver in our fight to
'We will keep driving action at home and pressing for solutions abroad.'
During the INC, George met South African industry, business, and civil society to strengthen partnerships for a circular economy.
'Collaboration with all stakeholders is vital. We must build a system where sustainable practices are the norm, not the exception,' the minister said.
South Africa
George warned about toxic chemicals in plastics and the spread of microplastics into food systems and human bodies. 'It is unacceptable that microplastics are found everywhere, including in our own bodies. We will act decisively to protect public health.'
South Africa's Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regulations and the polluter pays principle are already holding producers to account for the full life cycle of their products.
'Our EPR framework is a cornerstone of our strategy, and we will keep strengthening it,' George said, adding that the country will keep working at home and with global partners to secure a meaningful, inclusive plastics treaty that protects our planet and future generations.
In the final days of negotiations, the draft text of the treaty 'morphed into an appeal to corporate interests, with key elements like production reduction being gutted', noted
In response, the majority of states effectively blocked what would have been a 'hollowed-out, ineffective and non-binding agreement', it said.
'As talks ended without a clear way forward, it is crucial to change the process to break the deadlock. We leave with disappointment yet determination for the fight against
Pushing through a weak and destructive text, which was 'driven by corporate interests', would have presented no solutions to the plastics crisis, said
'The movement against plastics will continue to grow stronger, pushing for ambition at the local and national level in solidarity with and centring those most affected,' he said. 'From community-led zero waste initiatives to national campaigns for plastic bans, the pressure is mounting on governments to deliver the real solutions and a strong plastics treaty.'
No treaty is better than a bad treaty, noted Ana Rocha, the global plastics policy director at the
'We stand with the ambitious majority who refused to back down and accept a treaty that disrespects the countries that are truly committed to this process and betrays our communities and our planet.
'Once again, negotiations collapsed, derailed by a chaotic and biased process that left even the most engaged countries struggling to be heard. A broken, non-transparent process will never deliver a just outcome. It's time to fix it, so people and the planet can finally have a fighting chance.'
The majority of countries agreed on the need to cut plastic production, phase out harmful chemicals, ensure a just transition — particularly for wastepickers — establish a new dedicated fund to help developing countries implement the treaty, and make decisions through a two-thirds majority voting when consensus cannot be reached, among other ambitious measures.
But this was derailed by a small group of petro-states calling themselves the 'Like-Minded Group', which includes Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran, who '
Gaia said INC-5.2 had 'left ambitious countries lost in process' with surprising changes in schedule, 'blatant lack of transparency', overnight meetings starting as late as 2am, and a final plenary that started with 40 minute notice at 5.30 am — less than four hours after the chair's final draft was released and more than 14 hours after its scheduled time.
'Make no mistake, INC-5.2 has been an abject failure,' said the
'When faced with a failure of this magnitude, it's essential to learn from it. In the final days of the negotiations, we have clearly seen what many of us have known for some time — some countries did not come here to finalise a text, they came here to do the opposite: block any attempt at advancing a viable treaty.
'It's impossible to find a common ground between those who are
France's ecology minister, Agnes Pannier-Runacher, expressed disappointment that a handful of countries, guided by short-term financial interests rather than the health of their populations and the sustainability of their economies, had blocked the adoption of an ambitious treaty against plastic pollution.
'Plastic kills. It poisons our oceans, our soils, and ultimately, it contaminates our bodies … Oil-producing countries chose to look the other way. We choose to act.'
Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's head of delegation to the global plastics treaty negotiations, said the inability to reach an agreement in Geneva must be a wakeup call for the world.
'The vast majority of governments want a strong agreement, yet a handful of bad actors were allowed to use process to drive such ambition into the ground. We cannot continue to do the same thing and expect a different result.'
The
'In Geneva, negotiators could not agree on key provisions essential to protecting the environment and human health, including effective obligations to reach sustainable levels of plastic production, address health, and account for impacts across the full life cycle of plastics,' it said.
'While a small group of countries actively denied the scientific evidence, we were encouraged by the overwhelming majority who engaged constructively with it. Our scientists thank them for their hard work and courage, and we remain committed to providing robust, independent science to support the next steps in the negotiations.'
'This was never going to be easy but the outcome we have today falls short of what our people, and the planet, need,' noted Surangel Whipps Jr, the president of Palau, speaking as the chair of The Alliance of Small Island States.
'Still, even after six rounds of negotiations, we will not walk away. The resilience of islanders has carried us through many storms, and we will persevere because we need real solutions, and we will carve pathways to deliver them for our people and our planet.'
Azoulay said countries that want a treaty must now leave this process and form 'a treaty of the willing'.
And that process must include options for voting that deny the tyranny of consensus we have watched play out here.'
INC chair Luis Vayas Valdivieso said that 'failing to reach the goal we set for ourselves may bring sadness, even frustration. Yet it should not lead to discouragement.
'On the contrary, it should spur us to regain our energy, renew our commitments, and unite our aspirations. It has not happened yet in Geneva, but I have no doubt that the day will come when the international community will unite its will and join hands to protect our environment and safeguard the health of our people.'
Kate Lynch, Australia's head of the circular economy division, department of climate change, energy, the environment and water, said: 'We must acknowledge that hard line positions will not allow us to move ahead.
'Characterising any of our discussions in terms of winners and losers only makes us all ultimately losers. We really need to embrace the constructive spirit that we've seen in so many discussions here and in previous INC sessions and take some brave decisions to
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
4 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Saint or statesman? In India Madiba walked his own path
Prisoner-turned-president: Nelson Mandela's life and South Africa's struggle for freedom bore similarities to India's independence from the British colonial yoke and Mahatma Gandhi's role in its transition to a democracy: Photo: File As South Africa and the world observed International Mandela Day on 18 July, my thoughts returned to Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela — the man, the myth, the miracle. A moment etched in my professional and personal memory is how, during his 1995 state visit to India, Madiba diplomatically declined India's subtle efforts to canonise him as a 'saint' in the moral tradition of Mahatma Gandhi. I was among the South African media corps travelling with Mandela — one of his earliest diplomatic journeys as South Africa's first democratically elected president. It was a trip rich in symbolism and sentiment, coinciding with India's own Independence Day on 15 August — the day in 1947 when it broke free from British colonial rule. On that humid day in New Delhi, Mandela stood alongside the then prime minister, PV Narasimha Rao, at the Red Fort, attending the flag-hoisting ceremonies, parades and patriotic festivities. He listened attentively as Rao addressed a nation of more than one billion people. India, with its traditions, freedom struggle credentials and global democratic stature, was welcoming in many ways a kindred spirit. But the Indian media, swept up in the aura of Mandela — prisoner-turned-president, peacemaker-turned-legend — began to invoke saintly comparisons with Gandhi, their own apostle of peace and nonviolence. Gandhi, after all, had lived and worked in South Africa for two formative decades, where he pioneered the nonviolent resistance movement known as satyagraha. Mandela, who studied Gandhi's writings while incarcerated on Robben Island, had long acknowledged the influence of satyagraha on the ANC's strategy. After his release, as he navigated the treacherous road from armed resistance to reconciliation, it was Gandhi's legacy that offered a moral framework for South Africa's negotiated transition. Yet Mandela, ever the realist and self-effacing statesman, politely stopped short of accepting the spiritual elevation that Indian commentators — and some officials — seemed eager to offer. 'I am no saint,' he said during a press conference in Ahmedabad, where he paid homage at Gandhi's ashram. 'Unless you think of a saint as a sinner who keeps on trying.' The most memorable moment of the visit came when Mandela stood at Gandhi's ancestral home in Gujarat and said: 'You gave us Mohandas; we returned him to you as Mahatma.' It was a moment of diplomatic poetry and historical reflection. Gandhi had come to South Africa as a young lawyer, and it was there — facing institutional racism, fighting for the dignity of Indian indentured workers and learning the discipline of protest — that he was spiritually and politically transformed. When he returned to India in 1915, he was no longer just Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. He had become the Mahatma, the 'Great Soul'. Mandela's acknowledgment of Gandhi's South African apprenticeship was more than a tribute, it was a recognition of the moral traffic between the two nations. India, in turn, had supported the ANC since its banning in the 1950s, offering the party a semi-diplomatic mission in New Delhi, well before the world fully rallied behind the anti-apartheid cause. India was the first country to cut trade and diplomatic ties with apartheid South Africa. Long before Mandela became a global symbol, Indian leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi had extended solidarity to Oliver Tambo, Yusuf Dadoo and other leaders of South Africa's exiled liberation movement. India had even raised apartheid as a crime against humanity at the United Nations in the 1950s — a bold act of principled diplomacy. But in 1995, amid the adulation and symbolism, Mandela pushed back — gently but firmly — against the idea that he was Gandhi's reincarnation. In the sweltering heat of Ahmedabad, cradled in the philosophies of satyagraha, Mandela was met with reverence. Yet behind the protocol and pageantry, Indian officials quietly suggested that although they honoured Mandela, they saw him as his own man, not merely a disciple of Gandhi. This was not disrespect — far from it. It was a nuanced diplomatic gesture to honour Madiba's unique path, to recognise that although Gandhi's influence loomed large, Mandela had carved his own legacy. Unlike Gandhi's unwavering nonviolence, Mandela had once led uMkhonto weSizwe, the ANC's armed wing, in a strategic turn toward sabotage and resistance. He had walked a harder path — from armed revolutionary to peacemaker, from political prisoner to president. And he was human. Three marriages. Twenty-seven years behind bars. Flaws and scars. That was Madiba. Gandhi too, was no flawless saint. He too was complex and controversial. But in the theatre of international diplomacy, India's reluctance to canonise Mandela was a tribute in itself: to let him be a statesman, a father of his nation, without forcing him into another's shadow. The visit to India stirred echoes of another assignment I had undertaken — retracing Mandela's final moments as a free man before his 1962 capture by apartheid police. Disguised as a chauffeur, he was travelling near Howick in KwaZulu-Natal when he was intercepted — allegedly tipped off by a CIA operative stationed at the US consulate in Durban. That arrest would lead to the Rivonia Trial, life imprisonment and nearly three decades of silence. Now, in 1995, that same man stood in the Red Fort, feted by the Indian state and embraced by the Indian people. It was a powerful metaphor: from hunted fugitive to honoured guest, from revolutionary to revered elder. His journey mirrored Gandhi's, but it was also distinctly his own. This year marks 30 years since that unforgettable state visit. Mandela's presence in India was not just about diplomacy, it was about kinship. The emotional bond between the Indian National Congress and the ANC, forged in the fires of colonialism, apartheid and exile, had matured into state-to-state relations between proud democracies. Madiba's gratitude was evident. He often said India was the first place where he felt the ANC was treated as a government-in-waiting. He knew that South Africa's freedom was not only the result of domestic struggle, but also of international solidarity. And India had been there — early, steadfast and unapologetically committed. Mandela died in 2013, bearing 250 global honours including the Nobel Peace Prize. But during that 1995 visit to India, he left behind something more lasting: a diplomatic legacy rooted in shared values, mutual respect and an understanding that true heroes don't seek canonisation. Saint or not, Mandela walked his own path. Marlan Padayachee is a veteran political, foreign and diplomatic correspondent from South Africa's transition to democracy. He is a freelance journalist, photographer and researcher.
The Herald
15 hours ago
- The Herald
We are here to start the dialogue, says Ramaphosa
President Cyril Ramaphosa has emphasised his standing amid the wrangling over the national dialogue. Taking to the podium to address the national convention meant to kick off the dialogue, the president maintained he is well within his rights to oversee the process as its convener. 'I have called this first national convention in my capacity as your president, as the head of state. I have done so in line with section 83 of our constitution, which requires the president, as the head of state and head of the national executive, to promote the unity of the nation and that which will advance the republic. 'This is what brings me here. This is why I invited all of you here, to be here and be part of this dialogue,' said Ramaphosa. Despite the dramatic 11th-hour withdrawal from the dialogue by legacy foundations, Ramaphosa insisted there was a need to forge ahead as planned. Thanking them for their work preparing for the dialogue, Ramaphosa said any hesitation or postponement could erode trust in the process by civil society organisations and NGOs invited to share their views. 'For more than a year, various formations of civil society have been working to conceptualise and champion the national dialogue. Central to this effort have been a number of legacy foundations established by and named for stalwarts of our liberation struggle. We express our gratitude and appreciation for the work of these foundations in giving life to the national dialogue.' He said this would open up a space where South Africans confront their realities openly, respectfully and constructively. ' This is not a partisan platform. This is a national platform. Here, no voice is too small and no perspective is too inconvenient to be heard. We are gathered to listen to each other, to understand one another and to chart a common path forward for our country. 'We meet at a time of profound challenges: economic hardship, unemployment, inequality, growing poverty and a crisis of confidence in our institutions. We also meet at a time when the world is rapidly changing and our ability to adapt and renew ourselves will define the next generation. But history teaches us that nations are not defined solely by their difficulties; they are defined by how they respond to challenges they face.' Ramaphosa said the South African struggle was one for freedom from the nightmare of apartheid, one that proved there was unity in diversity. 'It is a powerful force for transformation. Gathered in this hall are people from all across our land, people from all walks of life, people of all races, all classes, all languages and cultures.' Despite the diversity of those participating in forums like the dialogue, one thing that held South Africans together was that they were all 'sons and daughters of the same soil'. 'We share a common past. We share the same inheritance of division, of inequality and of injustice. We share the same pride at ending the crime of apartheid and establishing a constitutional democracy. We also share a common future. And that is why we have chosen to gather here today. Because each one of us, regardless of our differences, is committed to work together to build the future of which we all dream. 'We have chosen to be here because we believe in the power of dialogue and united action. We believe that if we share our concerns and fears, we can conquer them. If we understand the challenges we face, we can overcome them. 'If we know what hurts us, we can heal. If we know what divides us, we can unite.' He said across the length and breadth of South Africa, people would, and should, meet to talk about what worried them, what gave them hope and how they thought their lives and the country could be better.
The Herald
15 hours ago
- The Herald
Bail delay for four accused of hit on DA councillor Nhlalayenza Ndlovu
Bail proceedings for four men charged with the murder of DA councillor Nhlalayenza Ndlovu suffered another setback on Friday when the magistrate was booked off sick. The matter was set down for the official bail application in the Howick magistrate's court. Traditional leader of the Nxamalala tribal authority in Impendle Inkosi Simphiwe Eric Zuma, 55, Masobho Hlongwa, 31, Khayelihle Shabalala, 31, and Thabo Mathonsi, 26, are charged with murder. A fifth accused, Zwelithini Buthelezi, 43, turned state witness. Deputy director of public prosecutions advocate Lawrence Gcaba said they had learnt about the magistrate's absence when they arrived in court. Gcaba asked that the matter be postponed to August 22. This will coincide with the sitting of another pending matter which Zuma is facing, where he is alleged to have killed iNduna Qalokunye Zuma on January 23, 2023. He was released on bail of R25,000 for that matter. DA leader Francois Rodgers who attended the hearing was disappointed it was postponed. Stand-in magistrate Helene Wilkins said she had received several applications from the media to be allowed to film and photograph court proceedings. She said she would not make the determination and instead hand the matter over to the magistrate who would preside at the next court sitting. 'This will be canvassed at the next court date,' she said. The defence, including advocate Sthembiso Mdladla representing Zuma, has objected to the media requests while the state has no objections. Ndlovu was shot dead outside his home, in front of his wife, two children and a nanny. His family have since abandoned the home outside eMpophomeni. The accused were emotionless during the short proceedings, a sharp contrast to a previous appearance during which Zuma, who is related to Ndlovu, cried in the dock. When the matter was adjourned Zuma greeted several people seated in the public gallery. Outside court the prime minister of the Nxamalala tribal authority, Tallman Zuma, could not hide his disappointment about the delay over bail. He is among Zuma's fierce backers and deputy convener of the MK Party in the region. 'We have been left in limbo. Some of the affairs of the rural community have stalled because of inkhosi's absence. Though we have his subjects in the lower rung of the community structures where things are smooth, a problem comes when issues sometimes have to be escalated to inkhosi,' said Zuma. TimesLIVE
