Negotiators Won't Reach an Agreement in Geneva on a Plastic Pollution Treaty
Nations were meeting for an 11th day at the United Nations office in Geneva to try to complete a landmark treaty to end the plastic pollution crisis. They remain 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.
The negotiations at the U.N. hub 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, they're leaving without a treaty.
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 is being proposed at this stage on the latest draft.
Delegates are still meeting and have not decided on next steps yet.
Representatives of Norway, Australia, Tuvalu and others nations said they were deeply disappointed to be leaving Geneva without a treaty.
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.
Saudi Arabia said both drafts lacked balance, and Saudi and Kuwaiti negotiators said the latest proposal takes other states' views more into account and addressed plastic production, which they consider outside the scope of the treaty.
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 exceed 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 also revamped to state that the accord would be based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full lifecycle of plastics.
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.
Powerful oil- and gas-producing nations and the plastics industry oppose production limits. They want a treaty focused on better waste management and reuse.
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.
Thursday was the last scheduled day of negotiations, but work on the revised draft continued into Friday.
Science shows what it will take to end pollution and protect human health, said Bethanie Carney Almroth, an ecotoxicology professor at Sweden's University of Gothenburg who coleads the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty. The science supports addressing the full lifecycle of plastics, beginning with extraction and production, and restricting some chemicals to ensure plastics are safer and more sustainable, she added.
'The science has not changed,' she said. 'It cannot be down negotiated.'
Environmentalists, waste pickers and Indigenous leaders and many business executives traveled to the talks to make their voices heard. Some used creative tactics, but are leaving disappointed. Indigenous leaders sought a treaty that recognizes their rights and knowledge.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
5 hours ago
- The Diplomat
Taliban Rule Hits 4 Years as Global Divide Deepens
Four years ago, just before the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan, the group banned the sale of children's toys in Kandahar province. It was a sign of the group's draconian approach. As the group marks its fourth year back in power, the Taliban have closed off society to Afghan women and have enforced brutal authority in a country where people have been relentlessly repressed by waves of conflict, corruption, poverty, and displacement for over four decades. The myriad challenges in Afghanistan have compounded with the Taliban's rule. At the moment, more than half of the population requires lifesaving assistance, according to the United Nations. Afghanistan is facing a hunger crisis, with more than one-third of the population experiencing dangerous levels of food insecurity and severe poverty affecting 90 percent of the population. This poverty is so terrible that some parents have reportedly been forced to sell their children for survival, due to economic collapse and a healthcare crisis, among other grave humanitarian challenges. Not only that but Afghanistan ranks globally as the sixth most vulnerable country to climate change. The country has been enduring recurring climate-related disasters and faces severe water scarcity, with reports by humanitarian organizations noting that the capital, Kabul, might become the first modern city to run out of water by 2030. Amid these catastrophic humanitarian and climate crises, Afghanistan is also facing a severe rollback of basic human rights, particularly for women and girls. The Taliban's draconian restrictions have been contributing to increased suicide rates, especially among younger generations of Afghans. Not only have women and girls been erased from public life but they've also been dying as a result of the Taliban's decrees. The Taliban's edict requiring women to have a male chaperone to travel outside their homes has led to documented cases of women who urgently required medical attention, especially pregnant women, dying, unable to receive care in time because they weren't able to leave their homes to seek healthcare on their own. Even more troubling, at the end of last year, the Taliban banned medical training for women, which will further harm women's access to health care and increase maternal mortality rates across the country. Despite the urgency of the crises in Afghanistan, the international community's response has been fragmented and divided. This international division was on display in a recent resolution on the situation in Afghanistan adopted by the U.N. General Assembly. According to the Associated Press, the resolution calls on the Taliban to reverse their oppression of women and girls, emphasizes 'the importance of creating opportunities for economic recovery, development and prosperity in Afghanistan,' and urges donors to address the country's dire humanitarian and economic crisis.' Key U.N. member states cast different votes, exposing the divided international response to the urgent crises unfolding in Afghanistan. The United States voted against the resolution, while its major European allies voted in favor of it, and important regional actors including China, India, Russia, and Iran abstained from voting entirely. The contrasting votes by the different stakeholders reveal the evolving policies of these countries toward Afghanistan. At a time when global unity is crucial to address the devastating crises in Afghanistan, stakeholders have remained divided. This split has only allowed the Taliban to solidify its grip on power, with little accountability and pressure from the international community. The U.N. resolution followed Russia's recognition of the Taliban, becoming the first country to do so. While the move highlights Russia's rift with the West and its desire to contain the Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), Russian recognition doesn't remedy the Taliban's isolation. Rather, it shows all the more why stakeholders need to come together to pursue one coherent strategy to address the critical challenges in Afghanistan, including the humanitarian and human rights crises, while ensuring they do not give legitimacy to the Taliban. At the same time, stakeholders should continue to push for justice and accountability through international means, including the International Criminal Court. Four years into the Taliban regime, life for Afghans has become even more difficult, with basic aspects of daily life prohibited, while Afghanistan continues to sink deeper into crisis. The challenges in Afghanistan are daunting, but the foremost step is for the international community to come together behind a unified strategy aimed at achieving an Afghanistan where women are free to live according to their will and where girls can play without fear of repression.
The Mainichi
9 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Japan marks 80th anniversary of WWII surrender as concern grows about fading memory
TOKYO (AP) -- Japan is paying tribute to more than 3 million war dead as the country marks its surrender 80 years ago, ending the World War II, as concern grows about the rapidly fading memories of the tragedy of war and the bitter lessons from the era of Japanese militarism. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba expressed "remorse" over the war, which he called a mistake, restoring the word in a Japanese leader's Aug. 15 address for the first time since 2013, when former premier Shinzo Abe shunned it. Ishiba, however, did not mention Japan's aggression across Asia or apologize. "We will never repeat the tragedy of the war. We will never go the wrong way," Ishiba said. "Once again, we must deeply keep to our hearts the remorse and lesson from that war." In a national ceremony Friday at Tokyo's Budokan hall, about 4,500 officials and bereaved families and their descendants from around the country observed a moment of silence at noon, the time when the then-emperor's surrender speech began on Aug. 15, 1945. Just a block away at Yasukuni Shrine, seen by Asian neighbors as a symbol of militarism, dozens of Japanese rightwing politicians and their supporters came to pray. Ishiba stayed away from Yasukuni and sent a religious ornament as a personal gesture instead of praying at the controversial shrine. But Shinjiro Koizumi, the agriculture minister considered as a top candidate to replace the beleaguered prime minister, prayed at the shrine. Koizumi, the son of popular former Prime Minitser Junichiro Koizumi whose Yasukuni visit as a serving leader in 2001 outraged China, is a regular at the shrine. Rightwing lawmakers, including former economic security ministers Sanae Takaichi and Takayuki Kobayashi, as well as governing Liberal Democratic Party heavyweight Koichi Hagiuda, also visited the shrine Friday. The shrine honors convicted war criminals, among about 2.5 million war dead. Victims of Japanese aggression, especially China and the Koreas, see visits to the shrine as a lack of remorse about Japan's wartime past. Japanese emperors have stopped visiting the Yasukuni site since the enshrinement of top war criminals there in 1978. Emperor Naruhito, in his address at the Budokan memorial Friday, expressed his earnest hope that the ravages of war will never be repeated while "reflecting on our past and bearing in mind the feelings of deep remorse." Naruhito reiterated the importance of telling the war's tragic history and the ordeals faced during and after the war to younger generations as "we continue to seek the peace and happiness of the people in the future." As part of the 80th anniversary remembrance, he has traveled to Iwo Jima, Okinawa and Hiroshima, and is expected to visit Nagasaki with his daughter, Princess Aiko, in September. Hajime Eda, whose father died on his way home from Korea when his ship was hit by a mine, said he will never forget his father and others who never made it home. In his speech representing the bereaved families, Eda said it is Japan's responsibility to share the lesson -- the emptiness of the conflict, the difficulty of reconstruction and the preciousness of peace. There was some hope at the ceremony, with a number of teenagers participating after learning about their great-grandfathers who died in the battlefields. Among them, Ami Tashiro, a 15-year-old high school student from Hiroshima, said she joined a memorial marking the end of the battle on Iwo Jima in April after reading a letter her great-grandfather sent from the island. She also hopes to join in the search for his remains. As the population of wartime generations rapidly decline, Japan faces serious questions on how it should pass on the wartime history to the next generation, as the country has already faced revisionist pushbacks under Abe and his supporters in the 2010s. Since 2013, Japanese prime ministers stopped apologizing to Asian victims, under the precedent set by Abe. Some lawmakers' denial of Japan's military role in massive civilian deaths on Okinawa or the Nanking Massacre have stirred controversy. In an editorial Friday, the Mainichi newspaper noted that Japan's pacifist principle was mostly about staying out of global conflict, rather than thinking how to make peace, and called the country to work together with Asian neighbors as equal partners. "It's time to show a vision toward 'a world without war' based on the lesson from its own history," the Mainichi said.
The Mainichi
11 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Let's strive for global peace as we move toward 100th anniv. of WWII's end in Japan
Around the world today, gun triggers are being pulled and missiles are flying about, with "nuclear threats" going unchallenged. Humanity went through two worldwide wars in the 20th century. Out of regret over the catastrophic sacrifices paid, the United Nations was established. Conflicts were meant to be resolved through dialogue. Eighty years on, what is unfolding before our eyes today is the resurgence of "rule by force" and the nightmarish sight of the United States breaking rules when it was the guardian of post-World War II order. Insanity has shown no signs of abating, with the United Nations not even on the fringes of their mind. Japan also once experienced an era ruled by the madness of war. On the outskirts of the city of Nagano, central Japan, lies an underground bunker known as "Matsushiro Imperial Headquarters," built by drilling bedrock in a checkerboard pattern. It extends a total of more than 10 kilometers long. There was even a makeshift "Imperial Palace." The construction of the bunker commenced in the fall of 1944, and it was almost 80% complete before Japan was defeated in the war. The regime of the time was eyeing a "decisive battle on mainland Japan." The bunker was to serve as the nerve center of the government to give commands safely while avoiding aerial bombings. The "absolute national defense sphere" -- set during the war as essential regions for Japan to continue the war -- had already collapsed. As the country inclined toward spiritualism, calls for "suicide attacks by 100 million people" were made. The nation turned its back on truly necessary decisions, resulting in victims piling up through air raids, the Battle of Okinawa and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What Japan clung to was "preserving the national polity" centering around the emperor. It took no account of the lives of the people. The humongous bunker in the Shinshu region tells us that, after all these years that have passed, these were the very realities of the war. So how far has Japan managed to break with insanity? Certainly, Japan has never once exchanged fire since the end of World War II. The question is the "shadow of the United States" being cast over the country. The emperor at the time of the conflict was not prosecuted for war crimes at the discretion of the Allied occupation authorities, allowing Japan to return to the international community with its war responsibility being left ambiguous. The country initially pushed ahead with complete demilitarization. The tide changed with the Korean War, when Japan was considered a frontline base against communism and the wheels of rearmament began to turn. Japan's postwar diplomacy was based on the Yoshida Doctrine, named after then Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida. If Japan was to achieve economic growth while leaving its security to the U.S., it could help show off the superiority of the Western allies. This also fitted Washington's international strategy. After the end of the Cold War, regional conflicts have erupted. The U.S. stepped up its pressure on Japan to contribute internationally. The answer Japan came up with was security legislation that paved the way for the country's limited exercise of the right to collective self-defense. The integration of Japan and the U.S. has accelerated. Yet concerns linger over Japan's endurance against insanity if the country remains passive. It is even more so amid the circumstances where the U.S. is backing away from its role of maintaining international order. The rise of populism is making it difficult to confront insanity. Globalization has generated winners and losers, and the middle class that has supported democracy is shrinking. Entwined with anxiety about the future among youth and xenophobic sentiment, populism turns into a typhoon while teaming up with social media. The storm has also hit Japan. Politics vies for immediate "achievements," raising instability. Threats are being fueled. Some of the candidates who referred to Japan going nuclear in their campaigning for the House of Councillors election got elected. The late novelist and historian Ryotaro Shiba rated Japan around the early Showa era (1926-1989), when it was overshadowed by the war, as "itai" -- literally a child who doesn't feel like one's own. Even if the period was a mutant, it was part of Japan's history that is connected to modern society. Japanese society in the current Reiwa era (2019-) is urged to be one that will check where it stands and speak out if it finds something is amiss, so it will never again tumble down the hill toward destruction. We will continue our reporting with the lessons from having fueled parochial nationalism etched in our hearts. Let us not make the present day an interwar period, but carry on with the "postwar" era. For that to happen, we would first like to see global peace as we move toward the 100th anniversary of the war's end. (Japanese original by Hirotomo Maeda, Executive Editor)
