GENEVA: After three years of negotiations, global efforts to finalise the world’s first legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution collapsed without agreement in Geneva on Friday. Delegates from nearly 180 countries failed to reach consensus on a draft treaty, revealing deep divisions over the scope of the deal, decision-making procedures, and whether the treaty should address plastic production itself.Despite night-long discussions and a chaotic final plenary session that stretched into the early hours, negotiators were unable to bridge the widening fault lines. A revised draft text presented by the Chair lacked consensus, and by dawn, a weary room of delegates conceded there would be no deal.At the heart of the breakdown were conflicting visions. The High Ambition Coalition, made up of over 100 countries including the European Union, African nations, and small island states, pushed for a robust agreement with binding measures to reduce plastic production, phase out single-use items like cutlery and cups, and strengthen reuse and recycling systems. They also called for majority voting rules at future Conferences of the Parties (COP), arguing that consensus-based decision-making could paralyse the treaty.Opposing them was a bloc of oil-producing nations, including Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Russia, which dubbed itself the “Like-Minded Group”. Backed by India, this coalition resisted any regulation of upstream plastic production and insisted the treaty should focus solely on waste management. They also opposed any move away from consensus decision-making.India’s position was outlined in detail by Neelesh Kumar Sah, Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. Speaking during the closing plenary, Sah argued that the treaty’s scope must align strictly with the original 2022 UNEA 5/14 resolution, meaning it should focus on plastic pollution, not production.“We look at the treaty as addressing plastic pollution unambiguously, and not to delve into regulating the production of primary plastic polymers,” Sah said. He also rejected the idea of globally mandated phase-outs for specific products or chemicals, and firmly reiterated that all treaty decisions should be made by consensus.On financing, India warned against any mechanisms that could place an undue burden on developing nations, stressing the need for technology transfer to be mandatory, not voluntary. “A financial mechanism not based on the Rio Principles will put undue burden on developing countries, defeating the very purpose of fighting plastic pollution,” Sah added.The final hours of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2) were marked by confusion and disarray. The plenary was adjourned near midnight on what was supposed to be the last day, only to be abruptly reconvened at 5:30am, a move that left smaller delegations unprepared and under-resourced. A final draft was only released hours earlier.Civil society groups voiced strong criticism of the process. “No treaty is better than a bad treaty,” said Ana Rocha of the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA). “Once again, negotiations collapsed, derailed by a chaotic and biased process that left even the most engaged countries struggling to be heard.”Swathi Seshadri, a petrochemical analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), said that despite the collapse, the urgency remains. “There is hope, as negotiations will continue in a resumed session. But member states must act quickly. The polymer industry is already facing slower growth, lower margins, and reduced profitability, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, where most expansion is expected. Delay will only deepen the economic and environmental cost,” she said.
Source link
