Iran and other oil producing countries reject plastics treaty draft, threatening negotiations
NAIROBI, 13 NOVEMBER 2023: The biggest question — as negotiators gathered in the well worn conference room at the UN Headquarters in Nairobi for the third round of plastics treaty negotiations — was whether the “zero draft” treaty produced by the Peruvian chair, Ambassador Gustavo Meza-Cuadra, would be accepted as the basis for further talks.
The draft, released on 4 September 2023, seeks to give legal form to a range of potential options for global rules and regulations to tackle plastic pollution, which were discussed, amid significant procedural disputes, during the preceding round of negotiations in Paris.
Meza-Cuadra’s plan had been characteristically straightforward: Open for an initial round of comments on the zero draft as a whole. Then break into more informal groups for in-depth discussion on its individual parts.
The day had started well for the chair. Inger Andersen, the Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme, and William Ruto, the President of Kenya, had both framed the zero draft as a product of “true multilateralism” and encouraged the negotiators, in their efforts to turn the draft into “a plan”, to embrace the “Nairobi spirit” — a term used to describe the tradition of environmental diplomacy to steer clear of politics.
But as Iran took the floor on behalf of an opaque group of “likeminded countries” in the afternoon, the spirit of Nairobi, it seemed, was starting to morph into the politicized and much dreaded ghost of Paris. In a coordinated intervention, the Iranian representative demanded that the informal groups put the chair’s zero draft aside and instead produce an alternative “updated zero draft” for the committee’s consideration on Wednesday.
Throughout the afternoon, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Russia, India, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates took the floor to support the Iranian proposal. The zero draft, these countries claimed, prejudged the direction of the negotiations, disregarded the role of plastics in the economy, and moved, in the Russian representative’s words, “far beyond” the negotiation mandate as set out in the UN Environment Assembly resolution from March 2022.
“It is clear” Saudi Arabia said, “that the [zero draft] lacks the needed balance”. Russia was even more direct, supporting the Iranian proposal and insisting that the chair’s zero draft “cannot be considered as a starting point for further negotiations”.
Iran did not reveal which countries, apart from itself, the “likeminded group” consisted of. In a preparatory meeting held on Saturday, Iran had claimed to be speaking on behalf of a new “coalition for plastic sustainability”, which included China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Cuba, and, Iran said, “a number of other countries”. The would-be coalition highlighted the merits of plastics “for sustainable economic growth”, called for a “bottom up” approach to the plastics treaty, and — in a statement reminiscent of the “guns don’t kill, people do”-shibboleth — claimed that “plastic polymers are not pollutants”.
There were signs, however, that the coalition was not as likeminded as Iran may have initially hoped. China — a major producer and consumer of plastics — had on Saturday been listed as a member of Iran’s “plastic sustainability” coalition. On Monday, however, China chose not to endorse the Iranian proposal, stating instead that the chair’s zero draft “covers the most important elements related to the instrument and the main ideas [presented by] member states, which provides a solid basis for [further] consultations”.
Moreover, the vast majority of countries that took the floor on Monday expressed support for Meza-Cuadra’s draft, with Solomon Islands stating, on behalf of the 63 members of the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution, that the zero draft “provides a good basis for negotiations” and the United States commending the chair for having “given us what is needed to move the discussion forward at this meeting”.
Whether Iran’s coalition will succeed in their efforts to replace Meza-Cuadra’s zero draft with a draft of their own remains to be seen. In principle, the divisions in the room are not unbridgeable, as all countries agree that the chair’s zero draft is not the final product of these negotiations and needs to be improved upon. However, the meltdown over the rules of procedure in Paris six months ago illustrates how quickly multilateral negotiations can result in deadlock when there is no clarity on how decisions may be reached.
In her opening statement, Ms. Andersen had recalled the “tears”, the “hugs” and the “joy” when the UN Environment Assembly adopted the plastics treaty negotiation mandate in March 2022. Those remembering that moment may be concerned that, eighteen months later, countries are still debating what “the starting point” for these negotiations should be.
