WHO continues efforts to monitor national health policies
Posted on 20.6.2022 by Ella Kietlinska and Joshua Philipp
Although the Biden administration has failed to give the World Health Organization (WHO) the power to impose a health emergency on any country without its consent, efforts to entrench the WHO through excessive regulation continue, international journalist Alex Newman finds on the show Crossroads from EpochTV.
In January 2022, the Biden administration proposed 13 amendments to the International Health Regulations aimed at giving WHO Director General (Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus) unilateral authority to declare a public health emergency in any country based on on the evidence of his choice.
These substantial amendments are currently being considered by the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of the WHO. Delegations from all member states met at the end of May to discuss it. But their adoption was blocked by the opposition of certain African and South American governments, in particular the Brazilian government, specifies Mr. Newman.
According to experts interviewed by Mr. Newman, these amendments should be incorporated into the international treaty on pandemics that the WHO and member states are currently developing. But if that effort is unsuccessful, similar amendments will be submitted again in September, when the next set of changes to WHO regulations are due.
A first draft of the treaty on pandemics must be finalized by August, continues the journalist.
For Mr Newman, the critical point of the amendments, if they are adopted, is that the director of the WHO “would no longer require the consent of the nations, or governments concerned, to declare a pandemic or a health emergency of international concern”.
“This is very clearly an attack on the national sovereignty of countries and the ability of people to govern themselves. »
For now, according to the US State Department and the WHO, the changes approved by the World Health Assembly are: a reduction of the time between possible amendments to the regulations from two to one year; approval of the creation of a new working group to draft and review the new amendments.
These two changes will therefore be considered as a priority in November, during the next assembly of the WHO, explains Mr. Newman. “The media [grand public] portray this as a sort of preliminary step toward achieving the Biden administration’s end goal. »
According to Mr Newman, the WHO is “extremely opaque”.
“It is very, very difficult to know exactly what happened [pendant la dernière rencontre] », he laments. For information on the conclusions of the last WHO general assembly, he had to contact the US State Department and the WHO directly.
“Dr Tedros and others have been very clear about their desire to see the World Health Organization given sweeping new powers. They want [que l’OMS] becomes the central mechanism in charge of coordinating all international health issues. »
They also request ” the right of sanction the nations who do not cooperate with the WHO programme”.
In his keynote address to the WHO Executive Board meeting on January 24, 2022, Dr Tedros outlined the organization’s five priorities for the next five years.
“The fifth priority is for the WHO to urgently become the authority that directs and manages global health, which is at the center of the entire global health architecture. »
The WHO commissioned independent experts to create a discussion group called “Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response”.
The Independent Panel is co-chaired by Helen Clark, former Prime Minister of New Zealand, and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, former President of Liberia.
The Panel seeks broad new powers for the WHO.
“They want the WHO to become politically and financially independent. It’s another way of saying that they no longer want national governments, they no longer want governments to be able to interfere in their operations. »
The idea is to make the WHO a ministry of planetary health, continues Mr. Newman.
On the other hand, the term “public health crisis” has been expanded to cover racism, climate change and gun violence.
“If everything is a public health crisis and the WHO is the mechanism in charge of dealing with them, then pretty much everything falls within its remit. »
Treating these other issues as a public health crisis is “opening the door to draconian controls on essentially all areas of life”.
Opposition to WHO escalation escalates
The media generally avoid covering WHO meetings, so very few people give them the attention they deserve. But this time, Mr. Newman notes, the proposed amendments met with strong opposition in America, at the state and federal level.
“Many parliamentarians and legal experts have pointed out that this is all unconstitutional. It is not the role of the federal government to manage our health care or to determine the type of policies to be implemented on the issue. »
The Constitution lists all of the legislative powers that are reserved for Congress, and health care policy is not one of them, Newman said. The federal government does not have these powers, so it has no right to delegate them to anyone, WHO or otherwise.
The Kansas Senate recently passed a resolution that “strongly disagree” amendments to WHO regulations, says Newman.
On the other hand, Florida state legislators have signaled to him that they want to enact legislation to prevent state and local governments from enforcing WHO executive orders or recommendations.
« Amendments to the WHO International Health Regulations proposed by the Biden administration […] will eventually hand over national sovereignty and authority from the United States to the WHO and place our democratic nation under the control of an unelected international organization that is completely unaccountable to the people of this country”indicates the resolution.
At the federal level, the House Freedom Caucus sent a letter to President Joe Biden urging him not to expand the powers of the WHO any further, and to withdraw the United States from the organization as had been done. Donald Trump.
The letter also demands that he show “full transparency” vis-à-vis the American people regarding the negotiations around the international treaty on pandemics. She recalls that, according to the Constitution, international treaties must be approved beforehand by two-thirds of the Senate.
Republican Senators Steve Daines of Montana and Tom Cotton of Arkansas sent him a similar letter.
On the other hand, Republicans in the House of Representatives have introduced a bill sponsored by 58 representatives to stop funding for the WHO and Senator Rick Scott (Republican-Florida) has proposed legislation to prevent the WHO to control US health policy.
The measure introduced by Rick Scott also opposes any changes to the WHO charter unless passed by a joint resolution of both houses of Congress.
“WHO’s Highly Ambitious ‘Pandemic Treaty’ Is a Dangerous Globalist Excess”Mr. Scott said in a statement. “We need to quickly pass this bill to ensure that public health issues in the country remain in American hands. » He also said that the WHO is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party.