Civil society groups have urged World Health Organization (WHO) member states to “continue to advance a pandemic agreement that can lay the essential groundwork for equitable, collective preparedness and response” ahead of the 13th meeting of the negotiating forum on Monday  (17 February). 

Only 10 negotiating days are left until the World Health Assembly in May, which is due to adopt the pandemic agreement. 

“Despite geopolitical and policy challenges, do not walk away from this vital mission. We urge Member States to stay focused on the end goal. Bank and build on the promising consensus agreed thus far,” urged the Pandemic Action Network, Panel for a Global Public Health Convention, Spark Street Advisors and The Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response in a statement.

The latest draft of the pandemic agreement (from INB12, 6 December) reflects that pathogen access and benefits sharing (PABS) and One Health remain sticking points as countries struggle to devise a global plan to advance pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. 

However, the new draft also contains more detail about what is expected from each member state to prevent outbreaks from becoming pandemics – which is an anxiety for poorer nations who fear this might mean more onerous financial commitments.

Since the last meeting of the Independent Negotiating Body (INB) in December, “we have witnessed deepening outbreaks of mpox and H5N1 and new outbreaks of Sudan Ebola and Marburg viruses. Any one of these threats risks spreading further without strong and decisive leadership and action,” the groups note.

“The finish line is in sight. Pandemic threats remain. The world needs member states to agree to a historic pandemic agreement and demonstrate the solidarity essential to keep us all safer. We are counting on you to pull together and get the agreement done.”

While the US and Argentina have given notice that they intend to withdraw from the WHO,  the US has to give a year’s notice so it technically remains part of all WHO member state bodies. At the recent WHO Executive Board meeting, the US was represented by technical officers at the US Geneva Mission. But US delegates to the EB made just one statement, on Taiwan, along with voting on geopolitically charged issues, such as an Israeli motion to combine the annual debates on two resolutions related to the health situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, into the agenda of WHO’s broader emergency work – a motion which lost.

However, sources told Health Policy Watch that US diplomats would not attend the INB negotiations at all. In fact, the Trump executive order withdrawing from WHO explicitly states that the “while the withdrawal is in process, the US will cease negotiations on the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the amendments to the International Health Regulations [IHR], and actions taken to effectuate such agreement and amendments will have no binding force on the United States.”  Amendments to the IHR, intended to provide for faster notice by countries to WHO and more efficient global response on epidemic threats, were approved in fact at the 2024 World Health Assembly, so it’s unclear if the US can retroactively declare that those have no binding force.  See related story.

‘The World Has Won’: New International Regulations to Protect Against Pandemics Finally Approved

As for Argentina, there is in fact no process for members states besides the US to withdraw without first obtaining agreement of the World Health Assembly – remaining in WHO as an “inactive” member is an option a few member states have used in the past, said Chief Legal Counsel Steve Solomon in a WHO press briefing Wednesday.

Solomon explained that when the United States first joined the WHO in 1948, it did so with a condition that it was entitled to withdraw if it chose to do so, but no other member state made that a provision of their original membership.