

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
and people across the world.
On October 24, the U.S. government withdrew support for a set of proposals for digital trade rules in talks at the World Trade Organization (WTO) that the U.S. itself had proposed in 2019.
With regard to negotiations on digital trade, or “e-commerce,” the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative stated: “many countries, including the United States, are examining their approaches to data and source code, and the impact of trade rules in these areas. In order to provide enough policy space for those debates to unfold, the United States has removed its support for proposals that might prejudice or hinder those domestic policy considerations.” However, variations on the proposed rules continue to be supported by other WTO members, as can be seen in the most recent leaked text, and it remains to be seen where the U.S. will sit in relation to those.
The proposals, developed and backed by Big Tech lobbying groups, were intended to limit governments’ ability to regulate cross-border transfers of data, as well as governments’ regulation of source code and algorithms, a source of significant public debate in many countries around the world.
Although Big Tech includes the largest corporations in world history, the industry is subject to far less regulation than other economic sectors.
The Biden administration’s step back from outdated Big Tech proposals in trade agreements is a huge symbolic win for workers and small businesses, as well as for fairness, democracy, and development around the world. It’s a major win for the civil society groups that form part of the Our World Is Not for Sale (OWINFS) global network that has campaigned against these rules since they were first proposed in other trade agreements as far back as 2015.
The U.S. first proposed these Big Tech rules when public opinion was largely unaware of the dangers of Big Tech corporations controlling our data, monopolizing key technologies, and preventing effective regulation of the digital environment.
Today, much of the world is far more aware of the damage caused by Big Tech as it monopolizes vast swathes of our economy to lock out fair competition for small businesses, profits from discrimination and surveillance, undermines civil rights, and foments extremism and disinformation. Using its vast economic power, it intervenes in policy-making processes to evade regulation, thereby weakening our democracies. Big Tech hoards, steals, and illegally collects data, the key economic resource today, thereby exacerbating inequities between industry owners and the rest of us. It also invades our privacy and makes us and our children less safe online. It violates workers’ rights in order to maximize profits.
All of these issues, and more, are subjects of contemporary debate, as well as multiple lawsuits, indictments, and financial penalties, in the U.S. and around the world.
For nearly a decade, Big Tech has tried to secure binding new global disciplines to constrain regulation on these issues and preempt appropriate governance through democratic channels. Although Big Tech includes the largest corporations in world history, the industry is subject to far less regulation than other economic sectors.
Big Tech’s proposals on source code are illustrative. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) has increased exponentially in recent years. AI involves using large data sets to train computers to make decisions using the data provided to them, based on instructions from algorithms written into the source code.
However, algorithmic systems can exacerbate racial, gender, and labor discrimination; facilitate corporate evasion of regulatory oversight; and be used to prevent competition. Yet Big Tech is pursuing proposals that would bar governments from having access to the source code for algorithms in order to regulate it. Companies use AI to decide more and more business practices, many of which, it turns out, often violate competition rules, privacy, or civil or labor rights. Thus, Big Tech wants to lock source code up in permanent, binding “trade” agreements to ensure that governments can’t regulate most of their business practices!
Proponents argue that these source code provisions are needed to protect against forced technology transfer (usually referencing China). But this is not considered a real issue in most of the countries party to digital trade deals. Source codes are already protected by intellectual property law, including copyright and, in some cases, patents, as well as trade secrets. The proposed bans on source code disclosures would have represented an additional layer of protection for algorithms embedded in source code, affecting a broad swathe of human activity in which hardly any other counterbalancing human, social, economic, or cultural rights would have been affirmed.
Extensive further reasons why exceptions to the source code text in these agreements are insufficient — in the US, the European Union (EU), and around the world — can be found in the report, “The European Union’s Digital Trade Rules: Undermining European Policy to Rein in Big Tech.” For example, experts have noted that for algorithmic systems, “white box” testing (with access to the source code) is far superior to “black box” testing (without it). True public oversight would require scrutiny, and thus access to the source code, by academics, media, critical engineers, and trade unions, and not only by the regulators and judicial adjudicators currently recognized in the proposed provisions.
In a debate in the European Parliament with this author, the head of services and digital trade for the European Commission, Sylvia Baule, tried to claim that the “general exceptions” in the WTO — the model for those in the digital trade provisions — would be sufficient to protect the public interest. However, these provisions have been successful in defending public interests in trade cases only 2 out of 48 times in the WTO’s history, which Baule sheepishly acknowledged was “not 100 percent.” In addition, enforcement of public interest laws, labor rights, and civil rights such as privacy must not be subject to review by a trade tribunal, which prioritizes trade considerations over human and fundamental rights.
Finally, the exceptions contemplate, however insufficiently, only some known risks inherent to AI systems. As new risks and social harms become known, it will be even more important for governments to maintain the power to regulate algorithmic systems, including their source codes, to ensure that human rights are upheld and that harms to society are reduced.
[Countries] need to use the public’s data for the public’s interest, such as for addressingclimate change or resolving global pandemics — rather than having it monopolized for the private profit of a handful of Big Tech corporations.
Allowing Big Tech monopolies to establish rules enabling them to transfer data around the world without regulation would also further tilt the playing field against workers, consumers, citizens, small businesses, and developing countries generally, thereby locking in unequal access to the greatest source of wealth creation in the future: data. Countries need to be able to use their data for digital industrialization, based on decent job creation. They also need to use the public’s data for the public’s interest, such as for addressing climate change or resolving global pandemics — rather than having it monopolized for the private profit of a handful of Big Tech corporations.
When these risks are considered, together with the myriad harms to society and development potential becoming more well-known each day (and detailed in “Digital Trade Rules: A disastrous new constitution for the global economy written by and for Big Tech”), it is difficult to avoid a conclusion: there is no compelling justification for, and in fact an abundance of arguments against, including provisions that bar governments from requiring the disclosure of source code, and from regulating data flows, in “trade” agreements.
Other provisions would also be harmful for development, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s “Joint Statement Initiative on E-Commerce (JSI): Economic and Fiscal Implications for the South,” and much other research available at the OWINFS site here.
Nevertheless, Big Tech has thrown a predictable temper tantrum since the announcement, deluging the press with outlandish claims that this prudent and cautious change will somehow benefit China (it won’t) or that it’s harmful to workers (it isn’t, and Big Tech wouldn’t care anyway).
None of these claims have merit. Yet their lobbying offensive demonstrates clearly how much Big Tech stood to gain economically from the provisions.
The EU, Japan, Australia, Canada, and other countries pushing these proposals should also hit the “pause” button. Their national industries were never set to gain from them; rather it would have been the local divisions of Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and the like, which formed the core of the lobbying pressure for the provisions around the world.
Developing countries being pressured to join these agreements can take this opportunity to strengthen their resolve. The Africa Group’s rejection of these proposals at the WTO in December 2017 set an important precedent. The majority of developing countries have stayed out of the so-called Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) by a breakaway group that led to negotiations on digital trade without a mandate from the WTO. This is despite an ongoing pressure campaign which includes the egregious use of “development aid” funds to lobby countries to join.
A few dozen developing countries have joined the JSI. Nigeria has proposed an exception that would allow them not to comply with the most problematic rules, but there’s no real chance it will be accepted. The change in the U.S. position is an important sign that the tide is turning against these rules, even in countries that have championed them. This new context provides a signal for countries to withdraw from participation. Many countries are also being pressured to accept the same provisions through bilateral or regional trade agreements, and these should also be rejected. And the US position could change again.
Preventing “trade” policy from imposing regulatory handcuffs on the digital economy is the first step toward using digitalization in the public interest, including for digital industrialization.
The change in the U.S. position is an important sign that the tide is turning...
Next, countries should fill that policy space with appropriate regulations. These would include rules to, for example, prevent monopolies and promote start-ups; prevent discrimination; ensure that civil rights, such as privacy and labor rights, are enforced in the digital sphere, and assess fair taxation; among others. For developing countries, technology transfer and a genuine commitment to supporting digital industrialization are top priorities.
Legal, policy, and programmatic developments in the EU, and some developing countries such as India, already go beyond the data flows and source code-related provisions proposed in the JSI. As their digitalization progresses, all countries will have to employ policies inconsistent with these provisions, as the U.S. — otherwise the home of digital laissez faire — has now realized.
In a few months’ time, WTO members will have to make a decision on another digital trade issue. More than 25 years ago, the U.S. snuck an agreement into the WTO to ban customs duties on electronic transmissions. But there is abundant evidence that Amazon, Netflix, Apple, and Microsoft can afford normal trade taxes on electronic books, movies, music, and software, while still making huge profits selling these products around the world. This agreement has been extended over and over. These taxes could be essential revenue sources for developing countries to build their digital infrastructures, not to mention for public services, climate resilience, and other key needs. A tax holiday for the most profitable of Big Tech corporations does nothing for workers or small businesses, in the United States or around the world. Now, developed country members of the WTO must drop their insistence on extending it yet again.
Instead, the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions should be allowed to expire at the upcoming 13th Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Abu Dhabi in February 2024. This will be the next test of the “worker-centeredness” of the trade policy of the U.S., the EU, and other countries.
Only with proper policy space — by keeping rules preventing effective regulation of the digital economy out of trade agreements — will citizens worldwide have a chance to rein in Big Tech.
Global health campaigners denounced U.S. President Joe Biden's administration for refusing to support a temporary suspension of patents for Covid-19 tests and treatments this year, a move that further delays the possibility of securing a World Trade Organization intellectual property waiver aimed at increasing access to lifesaving medical tools in developing nations.
In a statement released on Tuesday morning, U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said that "over the past five months, USTR officials held robust and constructive consultations with Congress, government experts, a wide range of stakeholders, multilateral institutions, and WTO members."
Tai continued:
Real questions remain on a range of issues, and the additional time, coupled with information from the USITC [United States International Trade Commission], will help the world make a more informed decision on whether extending the ministerial decision to Covid-19 therapeutics and diagnostics would result in increased access to those products. Transparency is critical and USTR will continue to consult with Congress, stakeholders, and others as we continue working to end the pandemic and support the global economic recovery.
As Bloomberg reported, investigations of the sort that Tai wants the USITC to pursue "can take nine months to a year to complete," pushing the prospects for a comprehensive waiver of the WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) well into 2023 or beyond.
Dr. Mohga Kamal-Yanni, policy co-lead for the People's Vaccine Alliance, said in response that "it is heartbreaking to see the Biden administration succumb to pressure from pharmaceutical company lobbyists and their henchmen in Congress."
"This moment of weakness will cost countless lives in low- and middle-income countries, leading to continued economic devastation."
"This moment of weakness will cost countless lives in low- and middle-income countries, leading to continued economic devastation," said Kamal-Yanni, "while a handful of pharmaceutical CEOs and shareholders will get even richer."
"The U.S. has had more than two years to meaningfully engage in WTO negotiations over access to lifesaving tests and treatments," she added. "Kicking the issue further into the long grass, just as the negotiating deadline approaches, is pathetic."
This sentiment was echoed by Arthur Stamoulis, executive director of the Trade Justice Education Fund.
"There have been at least 290,000 deaths from Covid-19 since the WTO punted on the question of global access to tests and treatments back in June," said Stamoulis. "How many more need to die before the U.S. joins the right side of history?"
"We're in the third year of the pandemic and billions of people worldwide still don't have access to Covid tests, vaccines, and medicines," Stamoulis continued.
Large swaths of the Global South have been deprived of lifesaving Covid-19 medical tools and remain completely unprotected, with less than 25% of people in low-income countries having received at least one vaccine dose to date.
Experts have long argued that pausing enforcement of the corporate-friendly TRIPS Agreement for the duration of the pandemic would remove the intellectual property barriers standing in the way of increased generic manufacturing. However, in June, Big Pharma-aligned policymakers--most of them from highly vaccinated rich countries--defeated a popular proposal to waive coronavirus-related patents to boost the global supply of jabs, diagnostics, and therapeutics.
Instead, the WTO, which operates on the consensus of its 164 members, adopted a watered-down alternative pertaining only to vaccines--described by critics as worse than the status quo--and vowed to decide whether to extend the decision to cover tests and treatments within six months. The Biden White House's new demand for a delay--in which they joined the European Union, United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Switzerland--comes just days before the December 17 deadline.
As Knowledge Ecology International director James Love pointed out on social media, the U.S. government blocked the proposed TRIPS waiver for tests and treatments after telling the World Health Organization that it is opposed to including intellectual property flexibilities in an emerging WHO pandemic treaty "because that's a conversation for the WTO."
Meanwhile, the need for improved access to tests and treatments is particularly acute in poor countries, given the ongoing severity of global vaccine apartheid.
The WHO estimates that just one in every 50 tests is administered in low- and middle-income nations home to 84% of the global population. While publicly available data on treatment access is sparse, a recent analysis from Oxfam and the People's Vaccine Alliance shows that just a quarter of Pfizer's Paxlovid pill orders are destined for developing countries.
Pfizer's licensing agreement with the United Nations-backed Medicines Patent Pool enables other drugmakers to produce its pill for generic consumption in just 95 countries representing 53% of the global population. As a result, excluded countries, many of which are not wealthy, may be forced to pay $250 per course rather than $25.
Globally, the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic has caused more than 15 million deaths directly and indirectly, and the disease alone continues to kill roughly 1,500 people per day.
The profoundly inequitable allocation of medicines--fueled by high-income nations snatching up a disproportionate share of vaccines, tests, and treatments and pharmaceutical corporations refusing to share knowledge and technology--has exacerbated avoidable suffering. Artificially imposed scarcity and uneven distribution also enables the coronavirus to continue circulating and mutating, increasing the likelihood of a vaccine-resistant variant emerging.
A recent investigation revealed the extent to which Big Pharma has lobbied against a robust intellectual property waiver for Covid-19 jabs, diagnostics, and therapeutics--and worsened deadly inequality in the process.
Tai's "call for 'more information' cannot be an excuse for inaction," Stamoulis said Tuesday. "While pharmaceutical monopolies make billions, people are still dying, others are getting long Covid, the economy is suffering, and new variants remain a constant threat."
"It's long past time," he added, "for the Biden administration to support the modest changes to WTO pharmaceutical monopoly protections standing in the way of Covid test and treatment access around the world."
A coalition of leading British health and public development organizations warned Wednesday that a leaked chapter of a proposed India-U.K. Free Trade Agreement contains provisions that could devastate India's ability to produce lifesaving medications, a development that would in turn adversely affect Britain's National Health Service--which gets a quarter of its drugs from the South Asian country.
"We'd be signing our own death warrants if we agree to a deal with these terms--the government simply has to back down."
The leaked chapter revealed that the prospective trade pact--progress on which has recently languished amid British political volatility--will enable pharmaceutical corporations to "evergreen," or indefinitely extend, their monopolies and charge artificially inflated product prices for years after the expiration of a drug's initial 20-year patent.
Another provision would eliminate "pre-grant" patent oppositions, a critical check on unjustified patents. Yet another removes the requirement for patent-holders to disclose to Indian authorities information relating to relevant patent applications in other nations.
"In the interests of patients of the NHS and across the world, the U.K. must urgently rethink its approach and open negotiations to full public transparency and parliamentary scrutiny, including meaningful engagement on intellectual property provisions," the groups said in a letter to U.K. Secretary of State for International Trade Kemi Badenoch.
The letter's signers--who include members of groups like Global Justice Now, Just Treatment, Medecins Sans Frontieres U.K., Oxfam, and STOPAIDS--argued that the draft agreement's intellectual property (IP) protections "go way beyond what is required under international trade rules--namely the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)."
"India's long-standing ability to produce quality-assured, affordable medicines for HIV, [tuberculosis], viral hepatitis, malaria, and other diseases, medicines that save millions of lives globally every year, relies upon its carefully drafted intellectual property laws and medical regulatory processes which balance the monopoly rights of manufacturers with everybody's right to health," the letter notes.
"India also supplies our NHS with 25% of all the medicines used to treat patients here in the U.K.," the signers added. "Any action that curtails India's ability to produce quality, cost-effective medicines also threatens the financial sustainability of our health service, and ultimately puts patients' lives at risk."
The letter asks Badenoch to:
"As an NHS nurse, I know how its budget has been stretched to breaking point and beyond. Our patients use high quality, affordable medicines from India every day," Just Treatment patient leader Carol Webley Brown said in a statement.
"I simply cannot understand why the government would willingly push for changes through this FTA that would push up drug prices for the NHS and put its budget under even more pressure," she added. "That's unless they simply care about their friends in the industry more than the lives of NHS patients."
"We'd be signing our own death warrants," argued Webley Brown, "if we agree to a deal with these terms--the government simply has to back down."
Dr. Andrew Hill, senior visiting research fellow at the University of Liverpool Institute of Translational Medicine, said that "the provisions set out in this leaked document would have extremely serious consequences for the NHS and global health, and the impacts would become more and more serious over time."
"By making it easier to secure patents and other forms of intellectual property monopolies on medicines, and much more difficult to challenge them, the U.K. government would be pushing the dramatic price-reducing effects of generic competition further and further into the future," he continued.
"Prices for the NHS will rise, patients will suffer," Hill added. "The naive idea that what is good for the pharmaceutical industry is good for patients and public health must be vigorously challenged. I urge the government to change course."
Baronnes Shami Chakrabarti, a member of the British House of Lords and human rights activist, said that "if accurate, this text doesn't just shame me as a British Asian, it risks India's ability to produce lifesaving medicines for millions of people around the world."
"I hope our prime minister knows what is being argued in his name and that India stands firm against corporate interests over people's lives," she added. "It is increasingly difficult to distinguish U.K. government statements from those of Big Pharma trade bodies. Our ministers resisted the Covid-19 vaccine intellectual property trips waiver that would have scaled up production and prevented many untimely deaths."
South Korea and the European Union's critiques of electric vehicle tax credit provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act--which U.S. President Joe Biden is expected to sign into law as soon as Friday--have sparked urgent calls for a global "climate peace clause" whereby nations would agree not to use archaic trade mechanisms to undermine the emission-reduction policies of other countries.
"It's time to end this circular firing squad where countries threaten and, if successful, weaken or repeal one another's climate measures through trade and investment agreements," Melinda St. Louis, Global Trade Watch director at Public Citizen, said in a statement Thursday.
"The U.S. should work with other countries to commit to a Climate Peace Clause and create a race to the top on trade and climate."
The E.U. and Seoul have specifically expressed concerns that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) limits EV tax credit eligibility to vehicles assembled in North America, a restriction that European Commission spokesperson Miriam Garcia Ferrer called "discriminatory" under World Trade Organization rules.
"It is discriminating against foreign producers in relation to U.S. producers," Ferrer told reporters earlier this week. "We continue to urge the United States to remove these discriminatory elements from the bill and ensure that it is fully compliant with the WTO."
Reuters reported that "South Korea also said on Thursday that it has expressed concerns to the United States that the bill could potentially violate WTO rules and a bilateral free trade deal."
"South Korea's trade ministry said in a statement that it has asked U.S. trade authorities to ease battery component and final vehicle assembly requirements," the outlet noted. "South Korea's auto industry group on Friday said it had sent a letter to the U.S. House of Representatives, requesting that the United States include EVs and battery components manufactured or assembled in South Korea as eligible for U.S. tax benefits, citing the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement."
Such objections have sparked concerns that U.S. efforts to subsidize the production and greater adoption of electric vehicles to counter transportation emissions--the largest source of greenhouse gas pollution in the U.S.--could draw formal complaints at the corporate-dominated WTO, potentially posing legal challenges to the EV tax credits and other attempts at climate action.
Global trade mechanisms, specifically Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions found in many agreements, have frequently been used by governments and corporations to challenge nations' climate policies, hampering the fight against the worsening planetary emergency.
"At the exact moment we should be promoting more green jobs initiatives in the U.S., we instead have the EU and other countries using threats of trade attacks to try to bully the U.S. into eliminating these types of programs, creating a race to the bottom in trade and climate," said Arthur Stamoulis, executive director of the Trade Justice Education Fund.
"It is time for countries to come together and agree to stop using trade rules to challenge commonsense climate and green jobs policies needed to build the clean energy economy," Stamoulis added. "The U.S. should work with other countries to commit to a Climate Peace Clause and create a race to the top on trade and climate. I urge the E.U. to reconsider this counterproductive action."
Hebah Kassem, acting director of A Living Economy at Sierra Club, added, "It's clear that the time for a Climate Peace Clause is now--so that all countries can get to the urgent business of taking bold climate action without fear of unnecessary challenges from trade agreements."
The World Trade Organization's complete failure on Friday to lift intellectual property barriers that have hindered vaccine and treatment access throughout the Covid-19 pandemic led nearly 300 civil society groups from across the globe--including Zambia, India, Bolivia, and Brazil--to call on governments to "outright defy" WTO patent rules if necessary to combat the still-spreading virus.
"A few wealthy countries promoting pharmaceutical corporation interests have been able to block the use of the WTO's waiver mechanism to temporarily suspend such barriers despite more than 100 WTO member countries supporting a waiver," the organizations said in a joint statement Friday. "This outrageous situation underscores that governments must take immediate actions to bypass the WTO's prioritization of pharmaceutical monopolies over human lives."
"Countries that don't accept these rules are subjected to trade threats and repercussions. This cannot continue."
The patent agreement that the WTO adopted in Geneva on Friday merely clarifies existing governmental authorities to ramp up vaccine production through compulsory licensing and eases some export restrictions, changes that are unlikely to do much to expand access in developing countries.
Given that the new WTO deal likely forecloses the possibility of a sweeping patent waiver in the near term, the 298-group coalition said that governments must "take every step necessary to save lives and end the pandemic, including by fully using the WTO's existing, albeit limited, flexibilities."
If those flexibilities aren't enough to guarantee sufficient production and equitable distribution of vaccines, therapeutics, tests, and other tools needed to fight the pandemic, the coalition urged governments to "circumvent the WTO's pharmaceutical monopoly rules when possible and outright defy those rules when needed."
And to ensure that developing nations don't face massive sanctions and other penalties for running afoul of patent protections, the civil society groups implored countries to "pledge not to use the WTO's and other trade and investment agreements' dispute mechanisms or other means in an attempt to stop or dissuade countries from producing, distributing, or using medical technologies or from sharing information on how to do so regardless of WTO and free trade agreement IP rules."
"The world must not allow the deadly vaccine apartheid that characterized the first generation of Covid vaccine manufacturing and distribution to be recreated when it comes to Covid diagnostics, treatments, and second-generation vaccines," the coalition said. "With the WTO process failing to suspend WTO IP rules to prevent this ongoing and disastrous injustice, governments who are also WTO member states must now act in good faith outside of the WTO's strictures."
The pharmaceutical industry's monopoly control over coronavirus vaccine production has led to higher costs and deeply unequal access to shots. More than two years into the pandemic, just 18% of people in low-income countries have received at least one coronavirus vaccine dose, heightening the risk that new and potentially more dangerous variants will emerge and spread worldwide.
While the World Health Organization and South African scientists have worked to replicate Moderna's mRNA-based coronavirus vaccine without help from the pharmaceutical giant, campaigners warn the company's existing patents could undermine efforts to widely distribute the technology.
"Even under Moderna's pledge not to enforce patents during the pandemic, the company could turn around and enforce patents while Covid-19 is still endemic in Africa," Tian Johnson, founder of the African Alliance, said earlier this year. "That would effectively derail all of the work that the WHO and African scientists have put into building vaccine manufacturing capacity on the continent. The damage that would cause extends beyond the fight against Covid, preventing Africa from preparing for the next pandemic."
Related Content

Observers have also raised concerns that developing countries could face massive reprisals from rich nations if they decide to ignore patent protections. As The American Prospect's Robert Kuttner explained last week, the U.S. government is required under a 1988 law backed by Big Pharma "to monitor other nations for violations of intellectual-property laws."
"Most countries in the world undergo this evaluation by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative annually," Kuttner noted. "If a country enacts drug price caps or makes it easy to make generic versions of medicines under compulsory licenses, it can be placed on a kind of blacklist. Countries on the list may have more difficulty selling bonds, raising private capital, and enlisting economic cooperation of the United States on other issues."
It's far from clear that the Biden administration would be willing to heed civil society groups' call to not retaliate against countries that defy patent protections in the interest of expanding access to Covid-19 vaccines and treatments. The administration largely took a backseat to the WTO negotiations despite claiming to support a waiver.
"Countries that don't accept these rules are subjected to trade threats and repercussions, undermining their own sovereign processes and rules," said the civil society coalition. "This cannot continue."
In a statement on Friday, U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said that "going forward, the Biden administration will continue work with WTO members, the private sector, and other partners to expand vaccine manufacturing and distribution to facilitate the global health recovery needed for a robust global economic recovery."
Read the full joint statement from 298 civil society organizations below:
More than two years into a pandemic that has killed 15 million people, World Trade Organization intellectual property barriers shamefully remain a deadly obstruction limiting global access to Covid-19 vaccines, tests, and treatments. A few wealthy countries promoting pharmaceutical corporation interests have been able to block the use of the WTO's waiver mechanism to temporarily suspend such barriers despite more than 100 WTO member countries supporting a waiver. The WTO's notoriously exclusionary, oppressive processes have been deployed instead to force through a sham text that will not improve global access to Covid-19 medicines because it not only fails to remove IP obstacles but outrageously adds further constraints to existing WTO flexibilities for medicines production. This outrageous situation underscores that governments must take immediate actions to bypass the WTO's prioritization of pharmaceutical monopolies over human lives.
By acting on behalf of pharmaceutical interests and blocking WTO removal of intellectual property (IP) barriers to global vaccines, tests, and treatment access, the European Union, Switzerland, and United Kingdom have betrayed the billions of people worldwide who still need access to lifesaving vaccines, medications, and diagnostics. In failing to deliver on a vaccine waiver for which it announced support and blocking the inclusion of treatments and tests, the United States has also turned its back on a planet desperate for the Covid pandemic to end.
The failure to temporarily waive the WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) as demanded by the vast majority of the world's countries and by public health experts and health workers, generic medicine manufacturers, human rights advocates, faith leaders, labor unions, community groups, scores of Nobel laureates and former heads of state, the World Health Organization director-general and even the Pope spotlights just how broken and dangerously out-of-touch the WTO remains.
Health needs cannot be subservient to pharmaceutical monopoly's profits. In response to the ongoing failure to adopt a temporary waiver of pharmaceutical IP monopolies on Covid medical countermeasures, civil society organizations around the globe are calling on governments to:
1. Pledge not to use the WTO's and other trade and investment agreements' dispute mechanisms or other means in an attempt to stop or dissuade countries from producing, distributing or using medical technologies or from sharing information on how to do so regardless of WTO and free trade agreement IP rules;
2. Take every step necessary to save lives and end the pandemic, including by fully using the WTO's existing, albeit limited, flexibilities;
3. Circumvent the WTO's pharmaceutical monopoly rules when possible and outright defy those rules when needed.
This united call comes as the WTO concludes its most significant decision-making meeting since the start of the Covid-19--the 12th WTO ministerial Conference--without agreeing to temporarily remove WTO IP rules that restrict the production and supply of Covid vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics
For roughly 20 months, the obstinance and bullying of a few very economically-powerful WTO member states was allowed to run roughshod over the wishes of more than 100 countries to waive WTO TRIPS obstacles to global access to Covid-19 medical tools. The TRIPS waiver text proposed in October 2020 by South Africa and India enjoyed cosponsorship from 65 WTO member countries, but outrageously negotiations on this text were never allowed. Under the WTO's unacceptable processes, a text written by the WTO secretariat and supported only by the main waiver-blocker, the European Union, was pushed forward to be railroaded through the Ministerial. History will harshly record the WTO's contribution to Covid vaccine, treatment and test apartheid.
The WTO's threat to global access to medicines did not start with Covid-19. For decades, the WTO has steadfastly refused to put shared global priorities like saving lives and ending pandemics ahead of the narrow profit and power-seeking interest of pharmaceutical monopolies. This was clear at the turn of the century during the peak of the HIV/AIDS crisis, and has only become even more clear with the WTO's unconscionable inaction during the Covid crisis today.
The WTO's draconian IP rules have already contributed to prolonging the current pandemic and, if countries can't get these rules out of the way, they will continue to contribute to massive public health, economic, and social damage during future pandemics as well. And pandemics are not the only matters of concern. Billions of people lack access to lifesaving medicines that prevent, treat and cure illnesses because intellectual property regimes distort research priorities, create scarcity by artificially restricting supplies, and allow excessive pricing and inequitable distribution that affects the poor and people living in lower-income countries. Countries that don't accept these rules are subjected to trade threats and repercussions, undermining their own sovereign processes and rules. This cannot continue.
The world must not allow the deadly vaccine apartheid that characterized the first generation of Covid vaccine manufacturing and distribution to be recreated when it comes to Covid diagnostics, treatments and second-generation vaccines. With the WTO process failing to suspend WTO IP rules to prevent this ongoing and disastrous injustice, governments who are also WTO member states must now act in good faith outside of the WTO's strictures.
The World Trade Organization's 12th Ministerial Conference ended Friday with an agreement on patent rights that campaigners said would do virtually nothing to address vast global inequities in coronavirus vaccine and treatment access, a failure they attributed to relentless obstruction by rich countries and the pharmaceutical industry.
Reached after marathon negotiations, the narrow deal clarifies governments' ability to use compulsory licensing to ramp up vaccine production without the consent of patent-holding pharmaceutical companies. The agreement also temporarily eases restrictions on the export of vaccines produced under compulsory licenses.
"The U.S. has sat silently in negotiations with red lines designed to limit the impact of any agreement."
The final text, which is set to remain in effect for a period of five years, drew furious responses from public health advocates who slammed the deal as a product of a fundamentally unequal process that saw rich nations--acting on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry--dictate the outcome with minimal regard for developing countries. One conference attendee, Anna Marriott of Oxfam International, said she heard that some national delegations did not even get a chance to see the text before it was adopted by the WTO.
"The conduct of rich countries at the WTO has been utterly shameful," said Max Lawson, co-chair of the People's Vaccine Alliance. "The E.U. has blocked anything that resembles a meaningful intellectual property waiver. The U.K. and Switzerland have used negotiations to twist the knife and make any text even worse. And the U.S. has sat silently in negotiations with red lines designed to limit the impact of any agreement."
"This so-called compromise largely reiterates developing countries' existing rights to override patents in certain circumstances," Lawson added. "And it tries to restrict even that limited right to countries which do not already have capacity to produce Covid-19 vaccines. Put simply, it is a technocratic fudge aimed at saving reputations, not lives."
The WTO's limited agreement is a far cry from the original patent waiver that India and South Africa introduced 20 months ago, in the early stages of a pandemic that has taken more than 15 million lives worldwide. The coronavirus has killed an estimated 30,000 people each day on average since India and South Africa unveiled their proposal in October 2020.
The two nations' waiver plan was backed by more than 100 WTO member countries, but rich governments derailed every attempted advancement of the text, offering alternatives that would leave in place--and even bolster--intellectual property restrictions that have hindered vaccine production throughout the pandemic. The pharmaceutical industry, which has raked in huge profits throughout the deadly pandemic, also lobbied aggressively against India and South Africa's proposed waiver.
To date, just 18% of people in low-income countries have received at least one coronavirus vaccine dose.
"Once again, the shameful, undemocratic WTO process allowed rich countries representing corporate interests to strongarm a sham agreement that bears no resemblance to the original waiver proposal and will do nothing to help save lives for this or future pandemics," said Melinda St. Louis, Global Trade Watch director at Public Citizen. "The worldwide movement that supported countries in the Global South that proposed a comprehensive TRIPS waiver, and fought valiantly for nearly two years, will not throw in the towel just because WTO members decided to today."
Dr. Christos Christou, international president of Doctors Without Borders, added that while "a few changes were made" to an earlier draft text that advocates panned, the final agreement "fails overall to offer an effective and meaningful solution to help increase people's access to needed medical tools during the pandemic as it does not adequately waive intellectual property on all essential Covid-19 medical tools, and it does not apply to all countries."
"The measures outlined in the decision," Christou added, "will not address pharmaceutical monopolies or ensure affordable access to lifesaving medical tools and will set a negative precedent for future global health crises and pandemics."
The 12th Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization kicked off in Geneva on Sunday amid mounting protests against rich nations' refusal to support a patent waiver for coronavirus vaccines and therapeutics, obstruction that has left billions of people around the world without access as Covid-19 continues to spread and take lives.
While WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala voiced "cautious optimism" that member countries will ultimately reach an agreement on patents and other key items on the body's agenda, civil society groups warned that the intellectual property text currently on the table represents such a departure from South Africa and India's original proposal that it can't even be called a waiver.
"The text under negotiation at the WTO is not the TRIPS waiver that more than a hundred developing country governments have been fighting for."
"We are extremely disappointed to see that even after 20 months of deliberations and more than 15 million deaths due to Covid, the negotiations are still eons away from ensuring access to lifesaving Covid medical tools for everyone, everywhere," said Candice Sehoma, advocacy adviser for South Africa at Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF).
"The draft decision text is based on a problematic text from early May and is substantively different from the real waiver proposal we have been supporting," Sehoma continued. "What we're seeing so far is some limited changes, not real progress."
Upon their arrival in Geneva on Sunday, WTO ministers were greeted with protests demanding that they resist lobbying from the pharmaceutical industry and suspend coronavirus-related patents, a move that proponents say would enable low-income countries to produce their own coronavirus vaccines without fear of legal retribution.
Thus far, Pfizer, Moderna, and other vaccine makers have closely guarded their patents and vaccine recipes, and the governments of wealthy countries have done little to force them to share despite the public funding and technology that made the coronavirus vaccines possible.
Critics argue that far from eliminating patent-related barriers to vaccine production, the current draft text at the WTO would actually create more, further hampering the fight against Covid-19 and undermining efforts to prepare for future pandemics.
"The text under negotiation at the WTO is not the TRIPS waiver that more than a hundred developing country governments have been fighting for, backed by a global movement of millions," Anna Marriott of People's Vaccine Alliance warned Sunday. "It would be unthinkable for the WTO to do nothing in a pandemic, but entirely unconscionable to agree to a deal that would make a bad situation even worse."
"We are deeply concerned that rich nations are negotiating to protect the interests of pharmaceutical corporations, enabled by a WTO intent on saving its own reputation, whatever the cost to public health," Marriott added.
On the opening day of the pivotal conference, the representatives of wealthy nations gave little indication that they're prepared to drop their support for the pharmaceutical industry's patent protections, which have allowed a handful of companies to rake in huge profits as large swaths of the globe remain unprotected against Covid-19.
As Swiss lawmaker Stefanie Prezioso put it Sunday, Switzerland and other rich countries are acting as "henchmen for Big Pharma."
During remarks on Sunday, Udo Philipp--Germany's state secretary at the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action--said the current moment requires a "reliable framework to protect intellectual property rights," not suspend them in the interest of equalizing vaccine access.
Germany, home to Pfizer's vaccine partner BioNTech, has long been one of the chief obstacles to substantive patent waiver talks. Because the WTO operates by consensus, obstruction by just one nation is enough to derail progress.
But Germany hasn't been alone. Despite paying lip service to the need for a patent waiver of some kind, the United States has faced backlash for dragging its feet at recent WTO talks and refusing to pressure holdout allies such as the United Kingdom, Canada, and Switzerland.
U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai didn't use the word "waiver" during her comments at the WTO conference Sunday, expressing support for "accommodations to the intellectual property rules for Covid vaccines that can facilitate the global health recovery needed to make possible a robust global economic recovery."
Patent waiver talks have gone virtually nowhere in the year since the Biden administration publicly endorsed a patent waiver, describing it as a necessary step given "the extraordinary circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic."
Sehoma of MSF argued in a statement that while "it is not yet too late to agree on a real waiver over the coming days," it is "imperative that governments stand strong against the inclusion of problematic provisions and strive for an agreement that adequately overcomes intellectual property and restrictive pharmaceutical corporation licensing so that countries can be more self-reliant in providing all Covid medical tools to their people, which is the intention of the original TRIPS waiver proposal."
"If governments agree on an outcome text that fails to include all essential medical tools, all countries, and all major intellectual property issues," said Sehoma, "then it will be both a failure to ensure that people have access to lifesaving medicines, vaccines, and diagnostic tests during this pandemic, and will set a deadly precedent for future global health crises."
It's shameful when leaders prioritize saving a floundering institution and obscene corporate profits over saving lives.
Unfortunately, that is precisely what may happen at the World Trade Organization (WTO), as trade ministers seem poised to thwart a two-year effort to remove trade barriers that impede global production of lifesaving COVID vaccines and treatments.
This shameful inaction by the WTO contributed to the tragic reality that still only 15% of people in low-income countries have received their first shot.
World Trade Organization (WTO) "intellectual property" rules require countries to guarantee pharmaceutical corporations' monopoly control over the medicines they produce, which means a long wait for production of generics.
So, as soon as COVID vaccines and promising treatments became available (thanks in large part to the public research on cutting-edge mRNA technology), it should have been a no-brainer for WTO members to quickly agree to temporarily remove those barriers and compel pharma corporations to share the know-how to rapidly increase production all over the world.
Sadly, that didn't happen.
Despite impressive efforts led by South Africa and India beginning in October 2020 for an emergency waiver of these WTO rules for COVID vaccines, tests and treatments, that was cosponsored by more than 60 other countries, wealthy countries blocked this effort to put human lives over Big Pharma profits.
After a powerful campaign led by public health, labor, and human rights organizations last year, in May 2021 President Joe Biden announced support for this important WTO waiver for COVID vaccines, which the world hoped would unlock the consensus needed at the WTO to deliver the waiver.
But the European Union, at the behest of Big Pharma-friendly Germany, continued to block action on the waiver, despite support by more than 100 countries.
And now - more than two years into the pandemic with an estimated 15 million lives lost - due to the EU's intransigence, the WTO has still not secured a comprehensive waiver of intellectual property rules that should have been delivered on day one.
This shameful inaction by the WTO contributed to the tragic reality that still only 15% of people in low-income countries have received their first shot, and the world will be ill-prepared to ramp up rapid production of next-generation vaccines targeting new variants, as well as lifesaving treatments and diagnostics.
Instead, WTO members in Geneva are now being forced to debate a shocking counterproposal that the WTO Director-General claims to be a "compromise" among the U.S., EU, South Africa, and India, but has only been endorsed by the EU.
The EU's support isn't surprising because the counterproposal does not waive the intellectual property barriers or achieve the goals of the original proposal. Instead, it is a clarification of existing, insufficient options that countries already have at their disposal. And it would even add new hurdles to countries trying to bypass intellectual property barriers.
The proposal also excludes tests and treatments, as demanded by the U.S., despite President Biden acknowledging that these tools are critical at this stage of the pandemic.
The EU and WTO leadership are hoping to force countries to agree to this terrible proposal so the WTO can claim to have done something to address the barriers that it created, when in fact public health experts worldwide have analyzed the text and are unanimous that it would actually be worse than nothing at all.
Negotiations in Geneva have been contentious. Rich countries have been proposing amendments to water down the already-unacceptable counterproposal. Waiver proponents have been left to beg for crumbs, requesting small improvements to a text that bears no resemblance to the original proposal. The pressure from WTO leadership has been intense, with regular lectures to country delegations that this text is "the only game in town," and they must reach agreement by the June 12 Ministerial or they will be "a failure."
It's embarrassing that the WTO as an institution is so broken that it cannot deliver an emergency waiver of its own rules in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic that shuttered the entire global economy.
It's not too late for WTO member governments to remember their responsibility is first and foremost to deliver for their people who have suffered immensely during this pandemic, not to salvage the relevance of a broken institution or to protect the profits of Big Pharma companies.
The U.S. government should follow the lead of experts in South Africa, India and around the globe, public health, human rights and labor organizations and prominent voices such as former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, and reject this unacceptable proposal and demand a comprehensive waiver of WTO rules for COVID vaccines, tests, and treatments.
UNAIDS executive director Winnie Byanyima and Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz this week offered a grim assessment of the state of patent waiver talks at the World Trade Organization, warning that sustained obstruction by rich countries has undermined hopes of a final deal and left billions without access to Covid-19 vaccines and treatments.
"The drug companies did not want a quick response. The slower the response, the higher their profits."
"In a pandemic, sharing technology is life or death, and we are choosing death," Byanyima said at a press conference held less than two weeks before the WTO's 12th Ministerial Conference in Geneva on June 12-15, when representatives from WTO member nations will gather to discuss a range of global issues, including massive and persistent vaccine inequities.
"Rich countries have an opportunity to do the right thing," said Byanyima. "In the coming few weeks, I implore them to put people ahead of profits. Hoarding the rights and recipes to life-saving, pandemic-ending medicines means letting people die, letting the pandemic struggle on, endangering everyone, and undermining the global economy."
Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia University, stressed the role that pharmaceutical companies have played in preventing governments from waiving patents and expanding the production of publicly funded vaccines and therapeutics
"The drug companies did not want a quick response," said Stiglitz. "The slower the response, the higher their profits. More people died, but that's not their concern. Their concern was profits over people's lives."
In October 2020, India and South Africa introduced a proposal at the WTO that would temporarily waive a major intellectual property agreement known as TRIPS in an effort to expand vaccine production, particularly in developing countries that have been denied sufficient access.
While many low-income nations have the capacity to produce mRNA-based coronavirus vaccines, patent protections and pharmaceutical companies' refusal to share their vaccine recipes have left poorer countries dependent on flimsy donation schemes.
"It should have happened long ago. Instead, negotiation has been derailed by a number of rich countries."
Proponents argue that a comprehensive TRIPS waiver combined with vaccine technology transfers--whether voluntary or mandated by governments--would empower low-income nations to produce their own vaccines without the threat of legal retribution from Big Pharma, enabling greater access and potentially forestalling the emergence of dangerous new coronavirus variants.
But rich nations--including European Union members, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States--and the powerful pharmaceutical industry have repeatedly derailed TRIPS waiver talks over the past year and a half as millions of people have died of Covid-19 worldwide.
"It will be difficult for us to live on this planet in a way of collaborating, of solidarity, of give and take to each other, if a few rich countries can hold out at the cost of lives in poorer countries," Byanyima said Wednesday. "This is not a way to go into the future."
At present, there's no clear path toward a deal to suspend patent protections.
Public health campaigners say recent proposals that the WTO and rich nation governments have characterized as potential compromise agreements veer so far from India and South Africa's original proposal that they can't be described as waivers at all.
Stiglitz argued one so-called compromise draft that was leaked in March and formally submitted to the WTO in May is "similar to that which is advocated by Europe, reflecting the interest of the pharmaceutical industry."
"The fact that the advanced countries, in Europe in particular, are not willing to put the lives into account of millions of people all over the world has undermined support for globalization and is leading to a more divided world with untold consequences going forward," the economist said.
Byanyima added that patent waiver negotiations should have been "simple and straightforward," given the enormous human costs of inaction in the face of a deadly public health emergency.
"It is frankly the minimum we should expect in the middle of a pandemic, when people are dying, to ensure that governments can take steps to protect public health, without WTO rules coming in the way," said Byanyima. "And it should have happened long ago... Instead, negotiation has been derailed by a number of rich countries."
The press conference came as Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the head of the World Health Organization, warned that reported coronavirus infections and deaths are "increasing in the Americas, while deaths are also increasing in the Western Pacific region and in Africa," the continent with the lowest coronavirus vaccination rate.
"Once again," said Tedros, "the pandemic is not over."
Just over a year ago, on May 5, 2021, the Biden administration pledged that it would support "waiving intellectual property protections for Covid-19 vaccines" at the World Trade Organization (WTO), in order to expand global access to cheaper, generic versions of vaccines.
The efforts to suspend intellectual property rules at the WTO were notably missing from the White House's summit fact sheet.
At the Second Global Covid-19 Summit this May 12, co-hosted by the United States, Belize, Germany, Indonesia and Senegal, a key goal was to "accelerate collective efforts to get shots into arms." Yet a power lineup of top U.S. officials--President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, USAID Administrator Samantha Power and Secretary of State Antony Blinken--failed to mention the WTO effort in their public remarks.
At the first Global Covid-19 Summit, which took place last September, the administration mentioned the need for a Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) waiver for vaccines as one of its key takeaways. This time, the efforts to suspend intellectual property rules at the WTO were notably missing from the White House's summit fact sheet.
The omission at this second summit rankled some public health activists. "Without addressing all the barriers to sharing technology across the globe, the summit ends up being about charity (which remains woefully insufficient) instead of the justice we need to see," Melinda St. Louis, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, which monitors corporate power, told In These Times in an email.
Relatively early in the pandemic, in October 2020, India and South Africa proposed that the WTO suspend key intellectual property rules related to Covid-19 vaccines, tests and treatments, so that the Global South could expand manufacturing of vaccines, in order to meet the global need. Yet, that proposal has been held up by opposition from the European Union, and lack of aggressive action from the Biden administration, despite the administration's May 2021 pledge.
A new compromise deal is now circulating in the TRIPS Council, the body that governs intellectual property rules. But activists have blasted that text as potentially more harmful than helpful, because it excludes tests and diagnostics, cuts off countries including China and all "developed" nations and introduces new barriers for the production of generics. The United States and European Union played a role in shaping some of the text's more harmful provisions.
Leading up to the Global Covid-19 Summit, public health groups had been calling for Biden to reject the circulating text and embrace a comprehensive intellectual property waiver (which is commonly referred to as a TRIPS waiver). In a May 9 letter, more than 170 U.S.-based social justice, labor and interfaith organizations made this demand, arguing, "We need every possible tool to overcome barriers and improve equitable access to Covid-19 medical products."
The stakes are high amid troubling global inequalities in access to Covid-19 vaccines, tests and treatments. Africa lags far behind the rest of the world in immunizations, with just 21.5% of its population having received one dose. This compares to 79% in the United States and Canada. According to a recent estimate by the World Health Organization, nearly 15 million people have died as a direct result of Covid-19, or due to its deterioration of public health systems between January 2020 and December 2021--a number that is more than twice the official toll.
The U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai is currently consulting with various parties and organizations about the text of an intellectual property deal. That could, in part, explain the silence of top officials. Yet, other countries that are also mulling the text used their platforms to speak out in support of a robust waiver.
"We continue to advocate for a TRIPS waiver in the WTO to improve global access to vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics so that the objective of having locally made vaccines is achieved," said South African President Matamela Cyril Ramaphosa, making a clear appeal for a more robust waiver for all Covid-19 health products, not just vaccines. This stands in contrast to the limited proposal circulating presently in the TRIPS Council.
"WTO rules, particularly TRIPS, need to be more flexible," said Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Biden did make one announcement at the summit that has promise for advancing global health equity, if the president follows through. "Today I'm announcing the United States will share critical Covid-19 technologies through the World Health Organization Covid-19 Technology Access Pool. We're making available health technologies that are owned by the United States government, including stabilized spike protein that is used in many Covid-19 vaccines," he said.
"The announcement is a turn toward sharing not only doses, but knowledge, which is the difference between charity and justice," said Peter Maybarduk, the director of Public Citizen's Global Access to Medicines Program, in a press statement. "This path, if pursued with seriousness of purpose, can improve resilience to future pandemics and bring a measure of justice to a terribly unjust time."
Yet, the lack of discussion of any TRIPS waiver among high-level Biden officials at the summit remains concerning for advocates. The Global South has considerable capacity to start manufacturing mRNA vaccines, but facilities are lying fallow, because companies like Pfizer and Moderna will not share recipes, copyrights and technical know-how.
"This Global Covid-19 Summit would have been a prime opportunity for the Biden administration to recommit to delivering a comprehensive TRIPS waiver and to ensure that it covers vaccines, tests and treatment, especially as talks have been derailed by European Union intransigence," said St. Louis of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch.
"A year has passed since President Biden announced support and, absent strong U.S. leadership, the WTO still has not delivered this important waiver."
Josh Mei contributed research to this report.