Plastics Treaty Talks End in ‘Abject Failure’ as US, Other Big Oil Allies Sabotage Progress
"The vast majority of governments want a strong agreement, yet a handful of bad actors were allowed to use process to drive such ambition into the ground," said one environmentalist.
NEW YORK, August 18 (IPS) - Negotiators in Geneva adjourned what was expected to be the final round of plastics treaty negotiations on Friday without reaching an agreement, a failure that environmentalists blamed on the Trump-led United States, Saudi Arabia, and other powerful nations that opposed any effort to curb plastic production—the primary driver of a worsening global pollution crisis.
The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) on Plastic Pollution agreed after 10 days of talks to resume negotiations at a yet-to-be-announced future date. Lobbyists from the fossil fuel industry swarmed the negotiations, working successfully to prevent a binding deal to slash plastic production. More than 99% of plastics are made from fossil fuel chemicals.
“The inability to reach an agreement in Geneva must be a wake-up call for the world: ending plastic pollution means confronting fossil fuel interests head-on,” said Graham Forbes, Greenpeace USA’s Global Plastics Campaign lead.
“The vast majority of governments want a strong agreement, yet a handful of bad actors were allowed to use process to drive such ambition into the ground. We cannot continue to do the same thing and expect a different result. The time for hesitation is over.”
The high-stakes talks marked the sixth time international negotiators have convened in an effort to craft a plastics treaty as production continues to grow and toxic pollution damages oceans, waterways, and communities across the globe. Talks in December similarly concluded without a deal.
The latest round of negotiations faltered after nations refused to rally around a pair of draft treaty documents—but for different reasons.
Supporters of a strong agreement—including Fiji, France, and Panama—objected to the exclusion of any binding plastic production cuts in the drafts, while the US, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and others balked at the scope of the proposals and argued any treaty should focus primarily on waste management.
The proposal unveiled Friday in a last-ditch attempt to reach consensus acknowledged that “current levels of production and consumption of plastics are unsustainable” but did not include any binding limits.
Under the current process, every nation must agree on a proposal’s inclusion in treaty text.
Countries that want a treaty must now leave this process and form a treaty of the willing. And that process must include options for voting that deny the tyranny of consensus we have watched play out here.
Agnès Pannier-Runacher, France’s minister of ecological transition, didn’t attempt to hide her fury at the outcome of the latest round of talks, calling out the “handful of countries” that “blocked the adoption of an ambitious treaty against plastic pollution” because they were “guided by short-term financial interests rather than the health of their populations and the sustainability of their economies.”
“The scientific and medical evidence is overwhelming: plastic kills. It poisons our oceans, our soils, and ultimately, it contaminates our bodies,” said Pannier-Runacher. “I am angry because France, together with the European Union and a coalition of more than 100 countries from every continent—developed and developing, determined and ambitious—did everything possible to obtain an agreement that meets the urgency of the moment: to reduce plastic production, ban the most dangerous products, and finally protect the health of our populations.”
David Azoulay, who led the delegation for the Center for International Environmental Law in Geneva, called the talks “an abject failure” and warned that any future negotiations will end similarly “if the process does not change.”
“We need a restart, not a repeat performance,” said Azoulay. “Countries that want a treaty must now leave this process and form a treaty of the willing. And that process must include options for voting that deny the tyranny of consensus we have watched play out here.”
Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.
Source: Common Dreams
IPS UN Bureau
© Inter Press Service (20250818050223) — All Rights Reserved. Original source: Inter Press Service
Where next?
Browse related news topics:
Read the latest news stories:
- International Day of Climate Action 2026 Thursday, October 22, 2026
- Bangladesh’s Hidden Climate Bill: How Much Are We Losing Without Counting It? Thursday, October 22, 2026
- What a Seawater Sample Can Tell Scientists About Ocean Health Thursday, October 22, 2026
- Were Half of Venezuela’s Oil Revenues Really Stolen? — Part I Wednesday, October 21, 2026
- The Sámi People and Reindeer Herding – a Struggle for Sápmi’s Whole Nature Wednesday, October 21, 2026
- As Winter Approaches, Afghanistan Faces Record Hunger and Mounting Human Rights Abuses Wednesday, October 21, 2026
- Fate unknown of many returned to DPR Korea from China: UN independent experts Wednesday, October 21, 2026
- ‘Ominous start’ to West Bank olive harvest amid settler attacks Wednesday, October 21, 2026
- World News in Brief: Aid for Ethiopia, Abyei drone strikes condemned, extreme heat and newborn health Wednesday, October 21, 2026
- Migrants paid up to $500 million in smuggling fees on European sea routes Wednesday, October 21, 2026