Tedros' Response to US rejection of the WHO

Observations

@DrTedros

Member States - State Parties to the International Health Regulations (2005) - have the right to decide whether or not to adopt and, subsequently, implement amendments to the IHR. We regret the US decision to reject the amendments adopted by consensus by the World Health Assembly in 2024 — including by the US, as the US played an active role in developing and negotiating those amendments together with other countries. Hence, I wish to correct inaccuracies stated by

@SecKennedy

and

@SecRubio

: - the 2024 amendments were proposed, negotiated and adopted by Member States, based on the learnings from the COVID-19 pandemic; - ⁠the 2024 amendments are not about empowering WHO, but about improving cooperation among Member States in the next pandemic; - the 2024 amendments are clear about Member States sovereignty. WHO has never had the power to mandate lockdowns, travel restrictions or other such measures - Member States have the power to do so if they see the need. - risk communication is an essential part of any emergency response, as populations need to be informed in a timely way. Using disease outbreaks for propaganda would be destructive and disastrous;

- WHO is impartial and works with all countries to improve people’s health. Here is the timeline of the WHO COVID-19 response: https://who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/interactive-timeline… Like the US, WHO would like to see better and stronger cooperation among countries in tackling current and future health threats. The world’s nations came together to create such a system when they created WHO, and they continue to support this system.

https://x.com/DrTedros/status/1946320396522795015

“Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.”

Matthew 10:16