Regardless of what they say, the World Health Organisation (WHO) is coming after national sovereignty.
Democracies and healthy societies are built on rationality and honesty. They may not always exhibit this, but these values must underpin major decisions. Without them, neither democracy nor justice is sustainable. In their absence, these foundations are replaced by a structure in which a few dictate to the many, and the excesses of feudalism, slavery or fascism rise to dominance. This is why so many fought so hard and for so long in defence of these ideals. People in democratic countries elect representatives to the privileged position of guardians of their freedom.
The WHO is promoting a pandemic treaty (currently in the form of a draft called ‘CA+’) and amendments to the existing International Health Regulations (IHR) to increase its power during health emergencies. These proposals also broaden the scope of emergencies to include potential rather than actual harm.
The draft treaty creates what it calls a ‘One Health’ approach – a nebulous concept describing a highly collectivised global mechanism overseen by the WHO. If the treaty comes to be, emergency decision-making power will be placed in the hands of a single person, the WHO Director General. Signatory countries will then be obliged to follow orders.
Together, the two proposals aim to expand an international bureaucracy for health emergencies with an additional annual budget estimated by the World Bank at three times the WHO’s current budget. This programme is heavily backed by WHO’s major individual and corporate sponsors. These are entities that will directly benefit from the proposed setup. However, it will mainly be funded by taxpayers.
This all represents a drastic departure from the principles of public health. The WHO was originally intended to serve countries, not instruct them. The proposals aim to reduce individual and national decision-making power, replacing this with obedience to the WHO. Of course, the organisation’s leadership denies this is the case. But this reflects a public messaging campaign that has little resemblance to the words in the proposed treaty. In WHO parlance, this denial amounts to misinformation.
Developing a drug cartel
Much of the WHO’s funding comes from private and corporate sponsors, who specify how their money will be used. Sponsor companies have a responsibly to their shareholders to use this relationship to increase profits. In turn, individuals are invested in companies who will gain from the WHO’s health emergency proposals. We saw this mechanism in action during Covid-19. The WHO’s sponsors can profit when the WHO takes control of potentially profitable aspects of health away from representative governments. Just imagine having the power to legally mandate entire nations use your product.
Read More: Why Legislators Should Reject the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty