{"id":332242,"date":"2025-08-10T04:21:15","date_gmt":"2025-08-10T04:21:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/332242\/"},"modified":"2025-08-10T04:21:15","modified_gmt":"2025-08-10T04:21:15","slug":"oil-states-against-production-cuts-deadlock-a-plastic-treaty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/332242\/","title":{"rendered":"Oil states against production cuts deadlock a plastic treaty"},"content":{"rendered":"

Before talks on finalising a global pact on plastic pollution got underway in Geneva<\/a> this week, many wondered which path the US would choose in the negotiations: take a backseat \u2013 certain that the Trump administration would never ratify a UN treaty \u2013 or try to actively weaken its ambition for everyone else.<\/strong><\/p>\n

As discussions near the mid-way point, it has become clear that Washington has opted to forcefully oppose any measures aimed at curbing plastic production that could potentially threaten the country\u2019s powerful petrochemical industry, negotiators and observers told Climate Home News.<\/p>\n

In doing so, the US has sided with a group of fellow fossil fuel-producing nations, led by Gulf countries and Russia, in bringing the talks to a stalemate with no clear pathway to an agreement in sight.<\/p>\n

\n

Oil states accused of using scare tactics in bid to sink green shipping deal<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

On the other side is a coalition of nearly 100 countries, including Canada, Australia and many European, African, Latin American and Pacific Island nations, that support provisions aimed at reducing virgin plastic production to \u201csustainable levels\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe US approach now appears to be closely aligned with the countries that have been blocking progress throughout the process,\u201d said John Hocevar, Greenpeace USA\u2019s Oceans Campaign Director. \u201cFor the first time, the US is actively throwing its weight around to push other countries to go along with them\u201d.<\/p>\n

The US sent letters to a handful of countries urging them to reject any limits on plastic production and plastic chemical additives at the start of the talks, Reuters first reported<\/a>. A delegate from a Pacific island nation, who received the memo, told Climate Home it did not contain any clear threats, but reiterated that a treaty with upstream measures would be unacceptable.<\/p>\n

Straining multilateralism<\/p>\n

Diplomats from 184 countries have been locked in technical discussions behind closed doors over the last four days in an attempt to hammer out a pact in what is supposed to be the final round of negotiations. A previous \u201cfinal\u201d conference in Busan, South Korea, last November ended without an agreement<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Since then, the space for a global deal has narrowed further with the return of President Donald Trump to the White House and his firm preference for direct deal-making over multilateral accords.<\/p>\n

Two negotiators told Climate Home that the approach appears to be coming through in closed-door discussions in Geneva where the US has voiced its opposition to \u201canything global\u201d and showed no willingness to compromise.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe United States supports an agreement that respects national sovereignty and focuses on reducing plastic pollution without imposing onerous restrictions on producers that would harm US companies,\u201d a spokesperson for the State Department said on Thursday.<\/p>\n

On Tuesday, the US submitted a formal proposal<\/a> to amend an article outlining the treaty\u2019s objective and restrict it to the management of plastic pollution. That is despite the universally-adopted United Nations resolution which established negotiations calling for a deal covering the entire life cycle of plastics.<\/p>\n

Fossil fuel giants unite against production cuts<\/p>\n

Plastic production is set to almost triple by 2060<\/a> without intervention, according to the OECD. Only 9% of plastic is recycled globally<\/a>, with the majority ending up in landfills or leaking into oceans and rivers. As nearly all plastic is made from planet-heating oil, gas and coal, the sector\u2019s trajectory will have a significant impact on global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.<\/p>\n

As the world gradually shifts away from fossil fuels in energy systems, oil and gas-producing countries see the petrochemical sector as a lifeline. Seven countries, including China, the US and Saudi Arabia, are responsible for two-thirds of the world\u2019s plastic production, according to research from Zero Carbon Analytics.<\/p>\n

One negotiator from a developed country told Climate Home that those opposed to production cuts have now become more \u201chonest\u201d in openly saying that they don\u2019t want the treaty to interfere with their exports.<\/p>\n

In separate submissions this week, Saudi Arabia \u2013 on behalf of 22 Arab countries \u2013 Russia, India, Iran and Malaysia re-stated their rejection<\/a> of any measures on plastic production, suggesting the relevant article should be struck off the draft treaty text. Other countries including China and Brazil, which have not put forward official proposals, are quietly supportive of that position, three delegates said.<\/p>\n


\nThe Arab Group\u2019s proposal on the section of the treaty dealing with plastic production<\/p>\n


\nThe Arab Group\u2019s proposal on the section of the treaty dealing with plastic production<\/p>\n

In contrast, Panama \u2013 on behalf of 89 countries \u2013 and a coalition of Pacific island states re-submitted two broadly similar proposals<\/a>, first issued last year in Busan, mandating the adoption at a future first plastics COP of \u201ca global target to reduce the production of primary plastic polymers to sustainable levels\u201d.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Japan and South Africa put forward what some saw as compromise proposals calling on countries to respectively \u201cpromote\u201d and \u201cmanage\u201d plastic consumption and production. But no consensus has emerged around the text.<\/p>\n

A negotiator from the self-styled high ambition coalition said that, while the group has been willing to compromise on the exact wording and give reassurances to oil-producing countries, the treaty needs to send the right policy signal that the current production trajectory is unsustainable.<\/p>\n

To vote or not to vote<\/p>\n

With a stock-taking plenary scheduled for Saturday morning, informal talks are zooming in on alternative options to break the impasse before the diplomats are forced to return home empty-handed by next Thursday.<\/p>\n

\u201cFrustration is building, and as countries like the US say they will not accept approaches needed for the treaty to be effective, there are more states actively discussing taking things to a vote,\u201d said Greenpeace\u2019s Hocevar.<\/p>\n

Qualified majority voting is theoretically permitted if consensus fails under the draft rules of procedures governing the talks. But the rules were never finalised as a group of big emerging economies, including Saudi Arabia, China and India, pushed to keep what is effectively a power of veto<\/a> over decisions.<\/p>\n

Despite pleas from campaigners, governments have held back from calling for a vote so far. A negotiator said on Thursday that option is floating around more now, but, before triggering it, enough countries along the plastics supply chain need to get behind a meaningful and effective treaty.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Before talks on finalising a global pact on plastic pollution got underway in Geneva this week, many wondered…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":332243,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5311],"tags":[49,978,659],"class_list":{"0":"post-332242","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-united-states","8":"tag-united-states","9":"tag-us","10":"tag-usa"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/115002558997554895","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332242","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=332242"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332242\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/332243"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=332242"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=332242"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=332242"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}