
Tough US stance casts gloom over plastics pollution deal
GENEVA (Reuters) -- 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, told Reuters, 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, a global network of over 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 that 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 said nearly a million tons of plastic waste accumulates -- some of which washes up on the beaches of island states.
Some participants also blamed organizers, the International Negotiating Committee, a UN-established body supported by the UN Environment Program.
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 onboard 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.
One positive development was that top plastics producer China publicly acknowledged the need to address the full-life cycle of plastics, said David Azoulay, Managing Attorney of the Center for International Environmental Law's Geneva Office. "This is new, and I think this opens an interesting door."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Korea Herald
34 minutes ago
- Korea Herald
Putin agrees that US, Europe could offer NATO-style security guarantees to Ukraine, Trump envoy says
NEW YORK (AP) — Russian leader Vladimir Putin agreed at his summit with President Donald Trump that the US and its European allies could offer Ukraine a security guarantee resembling NATO's collective defense mandate as part of an eventual deal to end the war, a US official said Sunday. Trump envoy Steve Witkoff, who took part in the talks Friday at a military base in Alaska, said it 'was the first time we had ever heard the Russians agree to that' and called it 'game-changing.' 'We were able to win the following concession: That the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in NATO," Witkoff told CNN's 'State of the Union.' Witkoff offered few details on how such an arrangement would work. But it appeared to be a major shift for Putin and could serve as a workaround to his deep-seated objection to Ukraine's potential NATO membership, a step that Kyiv has long sought. It was expected to be a key topic Monday as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and major European leaders meet with Trump at the White House to discuss ending the 3 1/2-year conflict. Trump said Sunday on social media. 'STAY TUNED!' Article 5, the heart of the 32-member transatlantic military alliance, says an armed attack against a member nation is considered an attack against them all. What needed to be hammered out at this week's talks were the contours of any security guarantees, said Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also participated in the summit. Ukraine and European allies have pushed the US to provide that backstop in any peace agreement to deter future attacks by Moscow. 'How that's constructed, what we call it, how it's built, what guarantees are built into it that are enforceable, that's what we'll be talking about over the next few days with our partners," Rubio said on NBC's 'Meet the Press.' It was unclear, however, whether Trump had fully committed to such a guarantee. Rubio said it would be 'a huge concession." The comments shed new light on what was discussed in Alaska. Before Sunday, US officials had offered few details even as both Trump and Putin said their meeting was a success. Witkoff also said Russia had agreed to enact a law that it would not 'go after any other European countries and violate their sovereignty.' 'The Russians agreed on enshrining legislatively language that would prevent them from — or that they would attest to not attempting to take any more land from Ukraine after a peace deal, where they would attest to not violating any European borders," he said on 'Fox News Sunday.' European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, speaking in Brussels alongside Zelenskyy, applauded the news from the White House as a European coalition looks to set up a force to police any future peace in Ukraine. "We welcome President Trump's willingness to contribute to Article 5-like security guarantees for Ukraine and the 'coalition of the willing' — including the European Union — is ready to do its share,' she said. Zelenskyy thanked the US for signaling that it was willing to support such guarantees but said much remained unclear. 'There are no details how it will work, and what America's role will be, Europe's role will be and what the EU can do — and this is our main task: We need security to work in practice like Article 5 of NATO,' he said. French President Emmanuel Macron said the substance of security guarantees to secure any peace arrangement will be more important than whether they are given an Article 5-type label. At the White House meeting, Macron said European leaders will ask the US to back their plans to beef up Ukraine's armed forces with more training and equipment and deploy an allied force away from the front lines. 'We'll show this to our American colleagues, and we'll tell them, 'Right, we're ready to do this and that, what are you prepared to do?'" Macron said. 'That's the security guarantee.' Witkoff and Rubio defended Trump's decision to abandon a push for a ceasefire, arguing that the Republican president had pivoted toward a full peace agreement because so much progress had been made at the summit. 'We covered almost all the other issues necessary for a peace deal,' Witkoff said, without elaborating. 'We began to see some moderation in the way they're thinking about getting to a final peace deal.' Rubio, appearing on several TV news shows Sunday, said it would have been impossible to reach any truce Friday because Ukraine was not there. 'Now, ultimately, if there isn't a peace agreement, if there isn't an end of this war, the president's been clear, there are going to be consequences,' Rubio said on ABC's 'This Week.' 'But we're trying to avoid that." Rubio, who is also Trump's national security adviser, also voiced caution on the progress made. 'We're still a long ways off," he said. 'We're not at the precipice of a peace agreement. We're not at the edge of one. But I do think progress was made towards one.' Among the issues expected to dominate Monday's meeting: What concessions Zelenskyy might accept on territory. In talks with European allies after the summit, Trump said Putin reiterated that he wants the key Donetsk and Luhansk regions that make up the Donbas, European officials said. It was unclear among those briefed whether Trump sees that as acceptable. Witkoff said the Russians have made clear they want territory as determined by legal boundaries instead of the front lines where territory has been seized. 'There is an important discussion to be had with regard to Donetsk and what would happen there. And that discussion is going to specifically be detailed on Monday,' he said. Zelenskyy has rejected Putin's demands that Ukraine give up the Donbas region, which Russia has failed to take completely, as a condition for peace. In Brussels, the Ukrainian leader said any talks involving land must be based on current front lines, suggesting he will not abandon land that Russia has not taken. 'The contact line is the best line for talking, and the Europeans support this,' he said. 'The constitution of Ukraine makes it impossible, impossible to give up territory or trade land.'


Korea Herald
43 minutes ago
- Korea Herald
European leaders to join Ukraine's Zelenskyy for meeting with Trump
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — European and NATO leaders announced Sunday they will join President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Washington to present a united front in talks with President Donald Trump on ending Russia's war in Ukraine and firming up US security guarantees now on the negotiating table. Leaders from Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Finland are rallying around the Ukrainian president after his exclusion from Trump's summit on Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Their pledge to be at Zelenskyy's side at the White House on Monday is an apparent effort to ensure the meeting goes better than the last one in February, when Trump berated Zelenskyy in a heated Oval Office encounter. 'The Europeans are very afraid of the Oval Office scene being repeated and so they want to support Mr. Zelenskyy to the hilt,' said retired French Gen. Dominique Trinquand, a former head of France's military mission at the United Nations. 'It's a power struggle and a position of strength that might work with Trump,' he said. Putin agreed at his summit in Alaska with Trump that the US and its European allies could offer Ukraine a security guarantee resembling NATO's collective defense mandate as part of an eventual deal to end the 3 1/2-year war, special US envoy Steve Witkoff said in an interview Sunday on CNN's 'State of the Union.' It 'was the first time we had ever heard the Russians agree to that,' said Witkoff, who called it 'game-changing.' Later, French President Emmanuel Macron said the European delegation will ask Trump to back plans they drafted to beef-up Ukraine's armed forces — already Europe's largest outside of Russia — with more training and equipment to secure any peace. 'We need a credible format for the Ukrainian army, that's the first point, and say — we Europeans and Americans — how we'll train them, equip them, and finance this effort in the long-term,' the French leader said. The European-drafted plans also envision an allied force in Ukraine away from the front lines to reassure Kyiv that peace will hold and to dissuade another Russian invasion, Macron said. He spoke after a nearly two-hour video call Sunday with nations in Europe and further afield — including Canada, Australia and Japan — that are involved in the so-called 'coalition of the willing.' The 'several thousand men on the ground in Ukraine in the zone of peace' would signal that 'our fates are linked,' Macron said. 'This is what we must discuss with the Americans: Who is ready to do what?' Macron said. 'Otherwise, I think the Ukrainians simply cannot accept commitments that are theoretical.' European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said earlier at a news conference in Brussels with Zelenskyy that 'we welcome President Trump's willingness to contribute to Article 5-like security guarantees for Ukraine. And the 'coalition of the willing' — including the European Union — is ready to do its share.' Macron said the substance of security guarantees will be more important than whether they are given an Article 5-type label. 'A theoretical article isn't enough, the question is one of substance,' he said. 'We must start out by saying that the first of the security guarantees for Ukraine is a strong Ukrainian army.' Along with Von der Leyen and Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni and Finnish President Alexander Stubb also said they'll will take part in Monday's talks, as will secretary-general of the NATO military alliance, Mark Rutte. The European leaders' support could help ease concerns in Kyiv and in other European capitals that Ukraine risks being railroaded into a peace deal. Neil Melvin, director of international security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute, said European leaders are trying to 'shape this fast-evolving agenda.' After the Alaska summit, the idea of a ceasefire appears all-but-abandoned, with the narrative shifting toward Putin's agenda of ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO or even the EU. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on NBC's 'Meet the Press' on Sunday that a possible ceasefire is 'not off the table' but that the best way to end the war would be through a 'full peace deal.' Putin has implied that he sees Europe as a hindrance to negotiations. He has also resisted meeting Zelenskyy in person, saying that such a meeting can only take place once the groundwork for a peace deal has been laid. Speaking to the press after his meeting with Trump, the Russian leader raised the idea that Kyiv and other European capitals could 'create obstacles' to derail potential progress with 'behind-the-scenes intrigue.' For now, Zelenskyy offers the Europeans the 'only way' to get into the discussions about the future of Ukraine and European security, says RUSI's Melvin. However, the sheer number of European leaders potentially in attendance means the group will have to be 'mindful' not to give 'contradictory' messages, Melvin said. 'The risk is they look heavy-handed and are ganging up on Trump,' he added. 'Trump won't want to be put in a corner.' Although details remain hazy on what Article 5-like security guarantees from the US and Europe would entail for Ukraine, it could mirror NATO membership terms, in which an attack on one member of the alliance is seen as an attack on all. Zelenskyy continues to stress the importance of both US and European involvement in any negotiations. 'A security guarantee is a strong army. Only Ukraine can provide that. Only Europe can finance this army, and weapons for this army can be provided by our domestic production and European production. But there are certain things that are in short supply and are only available in the United States,' he said at the press conference Sunday alongside Von der Leyen. Zelenskyy also pushed back against Trump's assertion — which aligned with Putin's preference — that the two sides should negotiate a complete end to the war, rather than first securing a ceasefire. Zelenskyy said a ceasefire would provide breathing room to review Putin's demands. 'It's impossible to do this under the pressure of weapons,' he said. 'Putin does not want to stop the killing, but he must do it.'
![[Aziz Huq] America's national security for sale](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwimg.heraldcorp.com%2Fnews%2Fcms%2F2025%2F08%2F17%2Fnews-p.v1.20250817.2636434f5f064e308aced35413380862_T1.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
![[Aziz Huq] America's national security for sale](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fall-logos-bucket.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fkoreaherald.com.png&w=48&q=75)
Korea Herald
7 hours ago
- Korea Herald
[Aziz Huq] America's national security for sale
Perhaps the least interesting thing about the reported decision by US President Donald Trump's administration to allow Nvidia and AMD to export high-end semiconductors to China in exchange for 15 percent of revenues is that it is probably unlawful. More important is the window it opens onto how the presidency is using its national security powers not to advance the country's interests, but for its own, narrower ambitions. To understand what's at stake, consider Nvidia's H20 chips, which Trump, when justifying his decision, described as an 'old chip' that is 'obsolete.' In 2024, Nvidia sold about a million of these 'obsolete' H20s in China. This is about five times the number of similar chips sold by Huawei. The scale of Nvidia's advantage suggests that H20 chips, while no longer cutting edge, remain very valuable to Chinese firms. Nvidia's CUDA programming interface makes them easier to connect to other hardware than Huawei's products. Overwhelming evidence of H20 chips' continuing relevance came in January, when the Chinese firm DeepSeek used them to develop a breakthrough large language model delivering top-of-the-line performance without the price tag of OpenAI, Anthropic or Google models. Such semiconductors thus still play a pivotal role in the ongoing competition between China and the United States over AI, such that permitting their export undermines rather than advances US interests. China has growing access to all the other inputs to create new AI. Its universities can still recruit and educate top-flight scientific talent. It has ample data, energy and even a near-monopoly on rare-earth minerals used to build the AI 'stack.' But the gap between Nvidia's and Huawei's market share suggests that access to advanced chips (including H20s) remains a significant vulnerability. This explains the Trump administration's decision in April, three months after DeepSeek's release, to impose a new licensing requirement on H20 chips, with a presumption of denial. But now the White House has relinquished that lever without extracting any concessions from Chinese firms or Chinese authorities. And the US needs concessions from China. Consider that China controls 70 percent of the world's rare-earth minerals, which are needed for many digital tools. Items like the heat-resistant magnets needed for missiles, fighter jets, and smart bombs will remain in dangerously short supply. At a time of growing investment in military deployments in the Indo-Pacific that require these very tools, US trade policy seems to be cannibalizing US security policy. The Nvidia and AMD export deal, in short, is an unforced error. So, what motivated the decision? The president's authority to control exports of so-called dual-use goods (which can serve both civilian and military purposes), such as advanced semiconductors, stems from the 2018 Export Control Reform Act. The government is allowed to require 'licenses' for certain exports, while also 'imposing conditions or restrictions' on those licenses. One way to understand the Nvidia/AMD deal is by comparing it to this administration's other policies and finding patterns. Perhaps the closest parallel is the administration's treatment of the social media platform TikTok. Having tried to ban the platform during his first term on national-security grounds, Trump came into office under a statutory mandate to prohibit it unless its Chinese owners divested. In January 2025, the Supreme Court upheld the ban, which Trump postponed. The statute allowed a single 90-day delay, but only with a buyer on the horizon. Having blown past this deadline, Trump has simply refused to enforce a valid law that aligns with his own erstwhile position on national security. In both the TikTok case and the Nvidia/AMD deal, Trump violated a federal statute by allowing transactions with Chinese entities -- transactions the same administration once described as a source of serious security concerns. In both cases, this was done without a deal or negotiation to achieve a public-policy goal. But in the TikTok case, Trump was clear about his motives: TikTok, he thinks, helped him win the 'youth' in the 2024 election. National security considerations, that is, gave way to electoral advantage. The Nvidia/AMD deal offers similar advantages: A recent Congressional Budget Office estimate suggests that Trump's budget will increase the national deficit by $4.1 trillion. Squeezing money from tech firms can be framed as a political win and as a deficit offset, even though the revenue will be a mere drop in the bucket. Even better for Trump, because there is no statute that envisages revenue from export controls, there is no legal constraint on how the government uses them. Trump could, say, use the money for the White House's new ballroom, or it could construct more 'Alligator Alcatraz' prisons for undocumented immigrants. The message to US adversaries is clear: America's national security has been subordinated to the Trump administration's narrow financial or partisan interests. The sale has begun. Come bearing money, political favors or both.