Biden Health Chief Says W.H.O. on Track for a ‘Good Deal’ on Pandemics

American Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra told reporters on Wednesday that he is optimistic the member nations of the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) will agree on a framework to respond to future pandemics, despite the collapsed of talks on a proposed “pandemic treaty” this week.

Becerra is in Geneva, Switzerland, for the W.H.O.’s annual World Health Assembly (WHA). Prior to the opening of the Assembly this week, a working group attempting to draft a pandemic treaty – formally the “W.H.O. convention, agreement or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response,” or “WHO CA+,” as parties cannot agree on what kind of international legal document to make it – failed to agree on a such a draft to introduce to the greater U.N. body. Supporters of a binding international agreement on pandemics lamented the setback, but W.H.O. Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, insisted, “this is not a failure.”

Becerra, representing the administration of President Joe Biden at the WHA, told reporters that the expansive nature of such an agreement makes it a challenging diplomatic endeavor and the necessity of years of negotiations on such an ambitious document is not unusual.

“We think the elements of a good deal are already on the table and that is why we feel optimistic because those are pretty good deals,” Becerra said on Wednesday, according to Voice of America. “It is just a matter now of fine-tuning it to make sure everybody says we are ready to sign on the dotted line.”

Becerra urged observers to put “in perspective” the size of the “major international achievement” that a pandemic treaty would represent: “negotiations go on forever … you do not build a nation overnight.”

He reportedly added that “there is clear consensus that we cannot let the status quo be upon us if another pandemic comes.”

What to replace the status quo with has been the major point of contention. Tedros, the W.H.O. chief, began promoting the idea of a formal international agreement on how to respond to pandemics shortly after the onset of the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic, arguing that no such template exists and a future pandemic is inevitable. Supporters of a pandemic agreement argue that the W.H.O.’s woeful response to the coronavirus pandemic was in part due to the agency not being empowered enough to independently warn of public health emergencies without the approval of the states in question – in this case, China – and not having sufficient funds or resources to rapidly distribute vaccines and other medical products.

Detractors have warned that expanding the W.H.O.’s power could potentially endanger the sovereign of member states, giving the agency powers that should rightfully belong to national public health agencies. Critics have warned that such a document should not allow the W.H.O. to declare a public health emergency in a nation without that government’s approval. Other concerns include demands for “equity” from smaller participating states – essentially, a demand that wealthier states pay into an international fund to prepare for pandemics meant for poorer states – and draft provisions that may require countries to share intellectual property to expand access to new technology for treatments or vaccines related to diseases causing future pandemics.

Tedros has responded aggressively to these concerns, claiming they are the result of “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories.”

“W.H.O. will not even be a party to the agreement. The parties are governments and governments alone,” Tedros argued in February. “Far from ceding sovereignty, the agreement actually affirms national sovereignty and national responsibility in its foundational principles. Indeed, the agreement is itself an exercise of sovereignty.”

In early May, the working group’s debates on these topics concluded without resolution. The group agreed to continue discussions after the agreed-upon negotiation sessions, but ultimately failed to produce a draft WHO CA+ to show to the WHA.

“We are not where we hoped we would be when we started this process,” Roland Driece, co-chair of W.H.O.’s negotiating board for the agreement, lamented.

Independent of pandemic treaty negotiations, the WHA is also considering amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), an already existing international legal document. Among those amendments reportedly being considered are “equity” provisions to redistribute financial responsibilities and, reportedly, crafting a formal legal definition of what a “pandemic” is. Other amendments meant to improve pandemic response include the creation of a tiered warning system to grant countries clearer information on the nature of public health emergencies.

Currently, the W.H.O. has the power only to declare a “public health emergency of international concern” (PHEIC), without specifying the severity.

W.H.O. states have not at press time agreed on any specific amendments this year.

Speaking at the WHA, Becerra urged colleagues on Tuesday to modify the IHR.

“We shouldn’t wait for the worst case to descend. We should use our time — here, now, after two years — to take the meaningful steps that we know we must,” Becerra said. “Let’s capture the significant progress achieved over the past two years and finalize the proposed amendments to the IHRs this week.”

“Those amendments – especially the tiered alert system – will immediately make a difference in improving global preparedness,” Becerra contended. “Finalizing the IHRs will build confidence in our ability to work together and set the stage for a more constructive future on pandemic response. And, we can prove that the world is ready to respond in extraordinary ways to extraordinary events that threaten global health.”

In his remarks to reporters as published by Voice of America, Becerra said he believed “people generally agree with what we have to do in order to be ready to take on any pandemic.”

“I am the son of immigrants. Optimism is in my DNA and so, I believe we are going to get this done because it would be tragic, especially given how far we have come and not get it done,” he said.

Follow Frances Martel on Facebook and Twitter.