Global health treaty on future pandemics adopted after marathon talks

Countries agree on landmark WHO pandemic accord to avoid Covid-era mistakes.

A handout photo released by the World Health Organization (WHO) on April 16, 2025, shows Anne-Claire Amprou, French ambassador for global health and co-chair of the negotiations, with WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus after a consensus was reached on the Pandemic Agreement at WHO headquarters. Photo by Christopher Black/AFP

By Anna Fadiah and Hayu Andini

After years of tense and complex negotiations, a global health treaty on future pandemics was adopted early Wednesday following an intense final round of talks at the World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in Geneva. The landmark agreement is designed to prevent the kinds of devastating errors and inequalities that plagued the global response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Finalized after more than three years of deliberation and a last-minute marathon session that ended around 2:00 a.m., the accord marks what WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called “a significant milestone in our shared journey towards a safer world.”

He added, “The nations of the world made history in Geneva today.”

The deal, formally titled the Pandemic Accord, has been under discussion since 2021, as countries recognized the urgent need for a structured, equitable, and cooperative framework to prepare for future global health emergencies.

Covid-19’s legacy of inequity

The driving force behind the global health treaty on future pandemics was the widespread recognition that the Covid-19 pandemic exposed deep rifts in international solidarity. Wealthy nations hoarded vaccines and protective equipment, leaving lower-income countries scrambling for resources. The failure to share medical technologies, data, and vaccines in a timely and equitable manner led to unnecessary deaths and prolonged the crisis.

One of the most contentious points in the negotiations centered on Article 11 of the agreement, which deals with technology transfer for pandemic-related health products to developing nations. During the Covid-19 crisis, poor and middle-income countries accused wealthier states and major pharmaceutical firms of ignoring their needs.

While many developing countries pushed for mandatory technology sharing, those with powerful pharmaceutical lobbies—such as Germany, Switzerland, and the UK—resisted. The deadlock was finally resolved by allowing tech transfers only when “mutually agreed,” a compromise that smoothed over ideological divides.

A pathway for pathogen sharing

At the heart of the treaty is a new initiative: the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS). This framework will enable countries to rapidly share pathogen data with research labs and pharmaceutical companies, triggering faster development of diagnostics, vaccines, and treatments.

Supporters argue that this new system could dramatically shorten the time needed to respond to outbreaks and ensure that the benefits—such as vaccine access—are distributed more fairly. It also aims to prevent countries from hoarding critical information about dangerous pathogens, a problem seen in past outbreaks like SARS and Ebola.

Negotiators confirmed the final 32-page document had been completely approved by WHO member states. “It’s adopted,” declared co-chair Anne-Claire Amprou, prompting applause from the room of sleep-deprived delegates.

High stakes and global urgency

The conclusion of the talks comes at a time of increasing anxiety over emerging health threats—from the resurgence of measles to the global spread of bird flu, mpox, and Ebola. Health experts have repeatedly warned that the world remains dangerously underprepared for the next pandemic.

“There is no vaccine for complacency,” said one diplomat involved in the talks.

Tedros, who joined negotiators in the final hours, emphasized that while coordinating efforts to prevent and respond to pandemics will be expensive, the cost of failing to act would be far higher.

“Virus is the worst enemy,” he said. “It could be worse than a war.”

The Trump factor and US absence

Despite the diplomatic victory, the absence of the United States from the final negotiations cast a shadow over the celebrations. President Donald Trump, who had previously withdrawn the U.S. from WHO and ended its involvement in the pandemic treaty talks after taking office in January, has also slashed U.S. foreign health aid and proposed tariffs on pharmaceutical products.

Although American negotiators were not present, many feared that Trump’s influence could undermine the spirit of cooperation. The absence of one of the world's largest economies from the pandemic accord raises concerns about global enforcement and support.

“The ghost of U.S. withdrawal hovered over the room,” one European negotiator commented.

A symbol of multilateral resilience

Despite those worries, many leaders framed the deal as a triumph of multilateralism. Former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark, who co-chaired the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, praised the outcome.

“At a time when multilateralism is under threat, WHO member states have joined together to say that we will defeat the next pandemic threat in the only way possible: by working together,” she said.

Indeed, the process of negotiating a global health treaty on future pandemics has itself become a model of international cooperation—though the path was neither easy nor free of controversy.

Looking ahead to implementation

The treaty will now be submitted for formal adoption at the upcoming World Health Assembly next month. Once ratified, countries will begin implementing the agreement’s provisions—such as creating national pandemic preparedness plans, improving surveillance systems, and participating in the PABS system.

Still, many challenges lie ahead. Developing countries are calling for financial support to carry out their commitments, while wealthier nations are being asked to contribute to global funding mechanisms.

Eswatini’s delegate warned that celebrating too soon would be unwise. “Whilst we celebrate this moment, we need not rest on our laurels,” they said. “The real work begins now.”

This sentiment was echoed across delegations, many of whom acknowledged that signing the agreement was only the beginning of a long and complex process of reforming the global health architecture.

A new chapter in global health governance

The WHO pandemic accord, forged out of necessity and shaped by painful lessons from the Covid-19 era, represents a new chapter in how the world prepares for and confronts pandemic threats. With health crises becoming increasingly transnational, no single country can afford to stand alone.

As the world waits for the official signing of the treaty at the WHO assembly, attention will now turn to implementation and compliance. Can this deal, born of past mistakes, become a beacon of global solidarity? Or will it falter under the pressure of national interests and geopolitics?

Only time will tell. But for now, the adoption of the global health treaty on future pandemics is a rare and hopeful moment in international diplomacy—a signal that the world is willing to learn from the past and fight together for a healthier future.