EU Ready To Do Plastic Pollution Deal 'But Not At Any Cost'
With little over two days left to strike a global accord in talks at the UN in Geneva, Jessika Roswall said it was "time" to clinch a deal between oil-producing countries and more ambitious nations, including EU states.
Five previous rounds of talks over the past two and a half years have failed to seal an agreement, including a supposedly final round in South Korea late last year.
The current talks in Geneva opened a week ago but are due to close on Thursday.
"The EU is ready to do a deal but not at any cost," Roswall told reporters.
"We do like plastic... and we will continue to need it. However, we don't like plastic pollution and it's time to end plastic pollution as quickly as possible," the commissioner said.
She said any treaty should give businesses the certainty of a clear global framework in which to operate.
A cluster of mostly oil-producing states calling themselves the Like-Minded Group -- including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Russia and Iran -- want the treaty to focus primarily on waste management.
The EU and others want to go much further by reining in plastic production -- which on current trends is set to triple by 2060 -- and by phasing out certain especially toxic chemicals.
Danish Environment Minister Magnus Heunicke admitted that the "wide gap" between the rival camps was making the negotiations a challenge but said the work of tackling plastic pollution "will only get harder the longer we wait. So now's the time".
"There's going to be a whole lot more drama in the days to come," he said, "but our goal is this drama should end up in a deal", he said, speaking alongside Roswall at the United Nations.
He said all parties, including the EU, had to re-examine their red lines and see where they could tweak them in the interests of landing a deal by Thursday.
"If we all stick to our red lines then a deal is impossible," he said.
"So we have to look at those red lines and we have to negotiate and compromise -- because we will be worse off if we don't succeed in making a deal.
"That's not me saying 'a deal at any price': Not at all. But a deal that is legally binding and has strong text and lays the ground for our work in the years ahead in order to tackle plastic pollution."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
3 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
UN Warns Russia, Israel Of Conflict Sex Crimes Listing Risk
The United Nations warned Israel and Russia on Thursday that their militaries faced being listed as parties suspected of committing sexual violence in conflict in light of credible evidence of violations. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres's report said the two countries risked being added to a list of parties thought to use sexual violence including rape in conflict that includes Myanmar's military, Sudan's army and the Palestinian militant group Hamas. "Due to significant concerns regarding patterns of certain forms of sexual violence perpetrated by Israeli armed and security forces and Russian armed and security forces and affiliated armed groups, these parties have been put on notice for potential listing in the next reporting period," said the annual report. "These concerns relate primarily to violations recorded in detention settings." In the case of Israel, the report alleges "credible information" military and security forces perpetrated patterns of sexual violence including "genital violence, prolonged forced nudity and repeated strip searches conducted in an abusive and degrading manner." In February, the Israeli army said it had charged five soldiers for abusing a Palestinian detainee at a site used to hold Palestinians following the start of the war in Gaza in the wake of the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas. Among the charges was an allegation that the accused had stabbed a man with a sharp object "which had penetrated near the detainee's rectum." The report said there was "credible" evidence of violations "against Ukrainian prisoners of war, in 50 official and 22 unofficial detention facilities in Ukraine" and Russia. "These cases comprised a significant number of documented incidents of genital violence, including electrocution, beatings and burns to the genitals, and forced stripping and prolonged nudity, used to humiliate and elicit confessions or information," it said. In 2024, the human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine documented 209 cases of conflict-related sexual violence, including rape, the report added. Israel has cooperated with a special representative on the issue of sexual violence in conflict, whereas Russia has not, the report said. The report said however that Israel's refusal to grant access to inspectors had frustrated her ability to determine patterns and trends. Israel rejected the report's findings and called a letter that accompanied it from Guterres "unusual." "The UN must focus on the shocking war crimes and sexual violence of Hamas and the release of all hostages," Israel's ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said. "Israel will not shy away from protecting its citizens and will continue to act in accordance with international law." Russia's embassy to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment.
DW
3 hours ago
- DW
Europe holds its breath as Trump meets Putin in Alaska – DW – 08/14/2025
Europe hopes that Trump will threaten Putin with secondary sanctions if he doesn't agree to a ceasefire but dread a deal over their heads and against their interests. In a bid to influence the outcome of the meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, key European leaders got on a video call with the US president as Germany hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Berlin. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen posted on X that Europe, the US and NATO"strengthened the common ground for Ukraine," and will remain in close coordination. The EU's diplomatic intervention was aimed at impressing upon Trump the bloc's collective desire for peace, but also to brief him on the suspected motives of his Russian counterpart ― and warn against conceding Ukrainian territory in the talks. There was some hope that the European allies may have managed to convince Trump against selling out Ukrainian and European interests. Still, since they will remain far away while Trump and Putin hold closed-door talks, tensions over what may transpire remain palpable. During Wednesday's call, Ukraine and its European allies said they wanted a ceasefire before commencing any negotiations with Russia. Trump seems to have made a note of that, though it's not a precondition for him ― he believes a ceasefire "would be a show of goodwill from Russia," reported CNN. Even though Trump is meeting Putin without Zelenskyy in Alaska, he indicated there might be a trilateral meeting including the Ukrainian president soon. French President Emmanuel Macron said the trilateral could take place in a neutral country in Europe after the tete-a-tete in Alaska. Trump has said earlier swapping some territory may be necessary to end the war. But after speaking to the Europeans, he said no such concessions would be made without Zelenskyy at the table. And while Trump is still opposed to Ukraine joining NATO ― which Kyiv has long said was essential as a security guarantee, experts suggest the US may be more open to offering some other sort of assurance to deter future Russian aggression. "The nature of US security guarantees and practical contributions would be subject to further negotiations," Kristine Berzina, a Washington, D.C.-based senior fellow of the German Marshall Fund (GMF), told DW. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Ukraine and the EU also expect the US to ask Russia to pay part of the massive reconstruction bill as part of future negotiations. It is estimated to cost between $500 billion and $1 trillion to repair the damage caused by Russian bombings in Ukraine. Kyiv and its supporters argue a part of that should come from frozen Russian assets, about €200 billion of which are located in Belgium, predominantly in a bank called Euroclear. There is also a push for President Trump to ask for the return for thousands of Ukrainian children abducted by Russia, as well as Ukrainian prisoners of war. The bloc also hopes the US will tighten its screws and impose secondary sanctions on Russia if the Russian president refuses to hold fire. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Despite some relief after the call there are still fears that Putin may outwit Trump. Europe faces a difficult scenario if Putin convinces Trump to cut off weapons supply to Ukraine, even through European partners, and intelligence sharing, since Ukraine needs both US military equipment and reconnaissance. Another one of Europe's fears is that the US may withdraw its assets from the continent and make the alliance weaker. "Russia wants to push the US out of eastern Europe and assert military dominance. Putin could use this meeting to encourage the US to withdraw troops from Europe," said Rafael Loss, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR). This is a worrying possibility since, "the US is already reviewing its global force posturing." "In that case first and foremost the Europeans would need to shore up their own defenses" in eastern European nations, Loss said. "US force reductions are anticipated, though the scale of the withdrawal is not yet clear," said Berzina of the GMF. "But of course, this process is happening at the same time as the Ukraine and Russia negotiations are taking shape. It will be tricky for the US to withdraw troops from Europe if it wants to signal to Russia that the US is deeply committed to European security." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
DW
12 hours ago
- DW
Why does the US use secondary sanctions, and do they work? – DW – 08/14/2025
Will Donald Trump's threat to use secondary sanctions slow Russian aggression or dampen its economy? Some see them as a powerful deterrent, while others think they are impossible to effectively enforce. After Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the aggressor was hit with economic sanctions from the US, UK, European Union and others. These sanctions restricted domestic companies or individuals in how they trade and do business with Russia. The sanctions were an effort to make Russia change its course without resorting to direct military force. Since then, the sanctions have piled up. Russia's foreign assets have been frozen, and a majority of Russian banks have been cut off from the global banking system. To keep its economy going, Russia has redirected trade to other countries like China, India, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. To move its oil around the world, the country has turned to a fleet of "shadow tankers." To end this game of economic cat and mouse and bring Russia to ceasefire talks, the US Senate is working to pass a bipartisan bill that threatens "secondary sanctions" on countries that still do business with Russia. Primary sanctions are placed on foreign countries or entities, but they restrict the behavior of the sanctioning country's own citizens and businesses by limiting or prohibiting them from engaging with the sanctioned parties. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Secondary sanctions go a step further and extend to third-party countries, companies or individuals that do business with sanctioned parties. Even though these third-party entities aren't directly bound by the sanctioning country's laws, they are pressured to comply or face consequences should they do business in the sanctioning country. "Secondary sanctions do not attempt to force foreign subsidiaries to follow a sanctioning country's policies," according to John F. Forrer in a paper published by the Atlantic Council, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. "The sanctioning country restricts its own firms and/or citizens from having commercial dealings with designated firms or individuals." The proposed US legislation would enable 500% tariffs on goods from any country that buys or sells Russian oil, uranium, natural gas and petroleum or petrochemical products. The United States is the biggest proponent of secondary sanctions. Their power stems from the importance of the US dollar on a global level and from the fear of losing access to the US market or its financial system. Since a significant amount of cross-border trade is in dollars or passes through the US banking system, this gives the country great leverage. For many countries, keeping this access is more important than doing business with sanctioned regimes. "While secondary sanctions can 'work' as part of the larger package, the intent, timing and credibility of the threat are important," said Lena Surzhko Harned, associate director of the Public Policy Initiative at Penn State Behrend. They are an important tool with symbolic power. "However, like all threats, it loses its power if it is not perceived as credible or other loopholes are found," Harned told DW. The Obama administration used secondary sanctions to target banks and other companies doing business in Iran in a successful effort to get the country to negotiate about limiting its nuclear program. More recently, the US has used secondary sanctions on Chinese firms trading with or handling financial transactions with North Korea. The US also introduced secondary sanctions against entities doing business with Venezuela, especially in the oil and financial sectors, in an effort to isolate the Nicolas Maduro regime. This past April, President Donald Trump imposed secondary tariffs on countries that import Venezuelan oil. This month, Trump issued an executive order, levying an additional 25% tariff on India over its purchases of Russian oil. Sidestepping Congress the president has threatened further secondary sanctions on buyers of Russian energy. Not every country is a pushover when it comes to secondary sanctions, and some find creative loopholes to avoid much of their economic impact. They rely on alternative currencies, such as the Chinese yuan or cryptocurrencies. Businesses or countries subject to sanctions can barter or use intermediaries or shell companies to conclude deals. Secondary sanctions are difficult to enforce and risk retaliation. They can also push like-minded countries closer together — and therefore further from US influence. There is a rift between academics and practitioners on secondary sanctions. Many experts think they are not an effective foreign policy tool, according to Forrer, an associate professor and director of the Institute for Corporate Responsibility at the George Washington University's School of Business. "Many researchers view secondary sanctions as having all the worst attributes of economic sanctions, plus the added onerousness of potentially instigating new conflicts with allies and adversaries who object to the imposition of restrictions and economic hardship on their own industries and citizens," argued Forrer. In the end, it is difficult to say what exactly makes a country change course with so many parallel variables to take into account. "Secondary sanctions should be considered an option when designing economic sanctions, but only under a very particular set of circumstances," concluded Forrer. "As with any economic sanction, if deployed incorrectly, they can do more harm than good." "Not to use secondary sanctions against third parties is a waste of a potentially useful tool," agreed Harned, but warned, "to expect them to be a silver bullet is a misguided mistake."
