A worker is seen working at a plastic recycling center in Nakuru, Kenya.
Major Plastic Polluters Win as UN Treaty Talks Conclude Without Agreement
"Every day that governments allow polluters to continue flooding the world with plastic, we all pay the price," said one campaigner.
Environmental groups on Sunday decried the conclusion of a United Nations summit designed to secure an international treaty to combat plastic pollution after powerful oil- and gas-producing nations refused to agree to production limits and other more aggressive measures to curb pollution.
Failure to reach an agreement means the talks—known as the INC-5 round that took place in Busan, South Korea—will be extended to another round, but campaigners said the sabotage of a far-reaching treaty by fossil fuel interests is wasting precious time that the world's ecosystems, wildlife, and people can no longer afford.
"Every day that governments allow polluters to continue flooding the world with plastic, we all pay the price. This delay comes with dire consequences for people and the planet, ruthlessly sacrificing those on the frontlines of this crisis," said Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's Head of Delegation to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations.
Reuters reports that the "most divisive issues included capping plastic production, managing plastic products and chemicals of concern, and financing to help developing countries implement the treaty."
"It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Powerful oil producers, both private companies and governments of oil-producing nations, were seen as the key impediment to a deal. As the New York Times reported:
Saudi Arabia, Russia and other producers of petroleum, which is used to make most of the world’s plastic, have pushed back against measures that would address plastic pollution by placing curbs on excessive plastic production. The Saudis and their allies have also said they oppose any treaty that would start to list and phase out chemicals present in plastic that are thought to be harmful to health.
In closed-door negotiations late Saturday, Saudi Arabia, along with other nations, was pushing to delete entire paragraphs from the treaty text on who should finance the costs of implementing the agreement, according to a delegate with direct knowledge of the proceedings.
"Civil society, Indigenous people, waste pickers and affected peoples were locked out of the negotiations for days," said Sam Cossar-Gilbert of Friends of the Earth International.
At the same time, Cossar-Gilbert added, "220 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered to attend INC-5, the highest at any of the Plastics Treaty negotiations. The process is under attack by corporate power and a small minority of countries intent on nothing but blocking, weakening and delaying."
Eirik Lindebjerg, global plastics policy lead for the World Wildlife fund, said a "week of hard-fought and frustrating negotiations" in Busan ended "with governments no closer to agreeing on a solution to the worsening plastic crisis. It has now been over 1,000 days and five negotiation meetings since governments agreed to establish a legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution. Over this time, more than 800 million tonnes of plastic has been produced, over 30 million tonnes of which have leaked into our ocean, harming wildlife, poisoning ecosystems and destroying lives, to say nothing of the plastic that has been sent to landfill or burnt."
As did others, Lindebjerg pointed the finger at powerful nations that benefit from the plastics industry as the chief culprits to progress.
"For too long, a small minority of states have held the negotiation process hostage. It is abundantly clear that these countries have no intention of finding a meaningful solution to this crisis and yet they continue to prevent the large majority of states who do," he said. "It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Campaigners say the following round of talks, which will conclude the treaty effort, must not follow the same path as what occurred in South Korea.
"As we move forward with the Chairs non-paper which was approved by member states at INC-5 as a basis for future negotiations," said Cossar-Gilbert, "we demand a democratic, transparent and inclusive process for an ambitious Plastics Treaty."
And Lindebjerg added that it is now "increasingly clear that the majority of states that are committed to securing a meaningful agreement with the necessary binding measures to end plastic pollution must be ready to vote or adopt a treaty-of-the-willing. If INC-5 has shown us anything it's that we are not going to find the solution we desperately need through more of the same. The crisis demands more. People and wildlife demand more. And it is our governments' job to deliver."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Environmental groups on Sunday decried the conclusion of a United Nations summit designed to secure an international treaty to combat plastic pollution after powerful oil- and gas-producing nations refused to agree to production limits and other more aggressive measures to curb pollution.
Failure to reach an agreement means the talks—known as the INC-5 round that took place in Busan, South Korea—will be extended to another round, but campaigners said the sabotage of a far-reaching treaty by fossil fuel interests is wasting precious time that the world's ecosystems, wildlife, and people can no longer afford.
"Every day that governments allow polluters to continue flooding the world with plastic, we all pay the price. This delay comes with dire consequences for people and the planet, ruthlessly sacrificing those on the frontlines of this crisis," said Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's Head of Delegation to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations.
Reuters reports that the "most divisive issues included capping plastic production, managing plastic products and chemicals of concern, and financing to help developing countries implement the treaty."
"It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Powerful oil producers, both private companies and governments of oil-producing nations, were seen as the key impediment to a deal. As the New York Times reported:
Saudi Arabia, Russia and other producers of petroleum, which is used to make most of the world’s plastic, have pushed back against measures that would address plastic pollution by placing curbs on excessive plastic production. The Saudis and their allies have also said they oppose any treaty that would start to list and phase out chemicals present in plastic that are thought to be harmful to health.
In closed-door negotiations late Saturday, Saudi Arabia, along with other nations, was pushing to delete entire paragraphs from the treaty text on who should finance the costs of implementing the agreement, according to a delegate with direct knowledge of the proceedings.
"Civil society, Indigenous people, waste pickers and affected peoples were locked out of the negotiations for days," said Sam Cossar-Gilbert of Friends of the Earth International.
At the same time, Cossar-Gilbert added, "220 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered to attend INC-5, the highest at any of the Plastics Treaty negotiations. The process is under attack by corporate power and a small minority of countries intent on nothing but blocking, weakening and delaying."
Eirik Lindebjerg, global plastics policy lead for the World Wildlife fund, said a "week of hard-fought and frustrating negotiations" in Busan ended "with governments no closer to agreeing on a solution to the worsening plastic crisis. It has now been over 1,000 days and five negotiation meetings since governments agreed to establish a legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution. Over this time, more than 800 million tonnes of plastic has been produced, over 30 million tonnes of which have leaked into our ocean, harming wildlife, poisoning ecosystems and destroying lives, to say nothing of the plastic that has been sent to landfill or burnt."
As did others, Lindebjerg pointed the finger at powerful nations that benefit from the plastics industry as the chief culprits to progress.
"For too long, a small minority of states have held the negotiation process hostage. It is abundantly clear that these countries have no intention of finding a meaningful solution to this crisis and yet they continue to prevent the large majority of states who do," he said. "It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Campaigners say the following round of talks, which will conclude the treaty effort, must not follow the same path as what occurred in South Korea.
"As we move forward with the Chairs non-paper which was approved by member states at INC-5 as a basis for future negotiations," said Cossar-Gilbert, "we demand a democratic, transparent and inclusive process for an ambitious Plastics Treaty."
And Lindebjerg added that it is now "increasingly clear that the majority of states that are committed to securing a meaningful agreement with the necessary binding measures to end plastic pollution must be ready to vote or adopt a treaty-of-the-willing. If INC-5 has shown us anything it's that we are not going to find the solution we desperately need through more of the same. The crisis demands more. People and wildlife demand more. And it is our governments' job to deliver."
Environmental groups on Sunday decried the conclusion of a United Nations summit designed to secure an international treaty to combat plastic pollution after powerful oil- and gas-producing nations refused to agree to production limits and other more aggressive measures to curb pollution.
Failure to reach an agreement means the talks—known as the INC-5 round that took place in Busan, South Korea—will be extended to another round, but campaigners said the sabotage of a far-reaching treaty by fossil fuel interests is wasting precious time that the world's ecosystems, wildlife, and people can no longer afford.
"Every day that governments allow polluters to continue flooding the world with plastic, we all pay the price. This delay comes with dire consequences for people and the planet, ruthlessly sacrificing those on the frontlines of this crisis," said Graham Forbes, Greenpeace's Head of Delegation to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations.
Reuters reports that the "most divisive issues included capping plastic production, managing plastic products and chemicals of concern, and financing to help developing countries implement the treaty."
"It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Powerful oil producers, both private companies and governments of oil-producing nations, were seen as the key impediment to a deal. As the New York Times reported:
Saudi Arabia, Russia and other producers of petroleum, which is used to make most of the world’s plastic, have pushed back against measures that would address plastic pollution by placing curbs on excessive plastic production. The Saudis and their allies have also said they oppose any treaty that would start to list and phase out chemicals present in plastic that are thought to be harmful to health.
In closed-door negotiations late Saturday, Saudi Arabia, along with other nations, was pushing to delete entire paragraphs from the treaty text on who should finance the costs of implementing the agreement, according to a delegate with direct knowledge of the proceedings.
"Civil society, Indigenous people, waste pickers and affected peoples were locked out of the negotiations for days," said Sam Cossar-Gilbert of Friends of the Earth International.
At the same time, Cossar-Gilbert added, "220 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered to attend INC-5, the highest at any of the Plastics Treaty negotiations. The process is under attack by corporate power and a small minority of countries intent on nothing but blocking, weakening and delaying."
Eirik Lindebjerg, global plastics policy lead for the World Wildlife fund, said a "week of hard-fought and frustrating negotiations" in Busan ended "with governments no closer to agreeing on a solution to the worsening plastic crisis. It has now been over 1,000 days and five negotiation meetings since governments agreed to establish a legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution. Over this time, more than 800 million tonnes of plastic has been produced, over 30 million tonnes of which have leaked into our ocean, harming wildlife, poisoning ecosystems and destroying lives, to say nothing of the plastic that has been sent to landfill or burnt."
As did others, Lindebjerg pointed the finger at powerful nations that benefit from the plastics industry as the chief culprits to progress.
"For too long, a small minority of states have held the negotiation process hostage. It is abundantly clear that these countries have no intention of finding a meaningful solution to this crisis and yet they continue to prevent the large majority of states who do," he said. "It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic."
Campaigners say the following round of talks, which will conclude the treaty effort, must not follow the same path as what occurred in South Korea.
"As we move forward with the Chairs non-paper which was approved by member states at INC-5 as a basis for future negotiations," said Cossar-Gilbert, "we demand a democratic, transparent and inclusive process for an ambitious Plastics Treaty."
And Lindebjerg added that it is now "increasingly clear that the majority of states that are committed to securing a meaningful agreement with the necessary binding measures to end plastic pollution must be ready to vote or adopt a treaty-of-the-willing. If INC-5 has shown us anything it's that we are not going to find the solution we desperately need through more of the same. The crisis demands more. People and wildlife demand more. And it is our governments' job to deliver."