The UN’s New Political Declaration on Pandemics

The UN’s New Political Declaration on Pandemics
(Miguel Á. Padriñán/Pixabay)
David Bell
On Sept. 20, our representatives meeting at the United Nations will sign off on a declaration titled “Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response.” (pdf)

This was announced as a “silence procedure,” meaning that states not responding will be deemed supporters of the text. The document expresses a new policy pathway for managing populations when the World Health Organization (WHO), the health arm of the U.N., declares a future viral variant to be a “public health emergency of international concern.”

The WHO noted in 2019 that pandemics are rare, and insignificant in terms of overall mortality over the past century. Since then, it decided that the 2019 old-normal population was simply oblivious to impending annihilation. The WHO and the entire U.N. system now consider pandemics an existential and imminent threat. This matters, because:
  1. They are asking for far more money than is spent on any other international health program (your money).
  2. This will deliver great wealth to some people who now work closely with the WHO and the U.N.
  3. The powers being sought from your government will reimpose the very responses that have just caused the largest growth in poverty and disease in our lifetimes.
  4. Logically, pandemics will only become more frequent if someone intends to make them so (so we should wonder what is going on).
Staff who drafted this declaration did so because it's their job. They were paid to write a text that is clearly contradictory, sometimes fallacious, and often quite meaningless. They are part of a rapidly growing industry, and the declaration is intended to justify this growth and the centralization of power that goes with it. The document will almost certainly be agreed to by your governments because, frankly, this is where the momentum and money are.

While the declaration’s 13 pages are all over the place in terms of reality and farce, they are not atypical of recent U.N. output. People are trained to use trigger words, slogans, and propaganda themes (e.g., “equity,” “empowerment of all women and girls,” “access to education,” “technology transfer hubs”) that no one could oppose without risking being labeled a denier, far-right, or colonialist.

The declaration should be read in the context of what these institutions, and their staff, have just done. It's difficult to summarize such a compendium of right-speak intended to veil reality, but it's hoped this short summary will prompt some thought. Wickedness is not a mistake, but rather an intended deception, so we need to distinguish these clearly.

Doing Darkness Behind a Veil of Light

Put together, the following two extracts summarize the internal contradiction of the declaration’s agenda and its staggering shamelessness and lack of empathy:

“In this regard, we: ...

“PP3: Recognize also the need to tackle health inequities and inequalities, within and among countries. ...

“PP5: Recognize ... the illness, death, socio-economic disruption and devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.”

“Recognition” of devastation is important. SARS-COV-2 was associated with mortality predominantly within wealthy countries, where the median age of COVID-associated death was between 75 and 85. Nearly all of these people had significant comorbidities such as obesity and diabetes, meaning their life expectancy was already restricted. People contributing significantly to economic health were at very low risk, a profile known in early 2020.
These three years of socioeconomic devastation must, therefore, be overwhelmingly due to the response. The virus didn't starve people, as the declaration’s writers would like us to believe. Deteriorating disease control was predicted by the WHO and others in early 2020, increasing malaria, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, and malnutrition. Economic disruption in low-income countries specifically results in more infant and child deaths.
In Western countries, adult mortality has risen as expected when screening for cancer and heart disease are reduced and poverty and stress increase. Knowing this, the WHO advised in late 2019 to “not under any circumstances” impose the lockdown-like measures for pandemic influenza. In early 2020, under the influence of their sponsors, they advocated for them for COVID-19. The declaration, however, carries no note of contrition or repentance.

Undeterred by incongruity, the declaration goes on to describe COVID-19 as “one of the greatest global challenges” in U.N. history (PP6), noting that somehow this outbreak resulted in “exacerbation of poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty.”

In fact, it acknowledges that this caused a “negative impact on equity, human and economic development across all spheres of society, as well as on global humanitarian needs, gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, the enjoyment of human rights, livelihoods, food security and nutrition, education, its disruption to economies, supply chains, trade, societies and the environment, within and among countries, which is reversing hard-won development gains and hampering progress” (PP6).

To restate the obvious, this doesn't happen because of a virus targeting sick elderly people. It occurs when children and productive adults are barred from school, work, health care, and participation in markets for goods and services. Economic, social, and health catastrophe inevitably results, disproportionately harming poorer people and low-income countries, conveniently far indeed from the halls of Geneva and New York.

No, we weren't all in this together.

Not all were negatively affected by this catastrophe. People and corporations who sponsor much of the WHO’s health emergency work, and that of its sister organizations such as CEPIGavi, and Unitaid, did very well from the policies they advocated so strongly. Software and Pharma companies made unprecedentedly high profits while this mass impoverishment played out. The international agencies have also gained; construction and recruitment are strong in Geneva. Philanthro-capitalism is good for some.
The main aim of the declaration is to back the proposed WHO international health regulation (IHR) amendments and treaty (PP26), key to ensuring that viral outbreaks that have such small effects can remain highly profitable. An additional $10 billion per year in new financing is requested to support this (PP29). There is a reason most countries have laws against scams. The U.N. and its agencies, fortunately for its staff, are outside of any national jurisdiction.
Based on their sponsors’ assessments, the staff of these agencies are doing their job well. For the rest of humanity, their work is an unmitigated disaster. In 2019, they said never lock down, then they spent 2020 defending top-down lockdowns and mandates. For three years, they theatrically pretended that decades of knowledge on immunity, disease burden, and the association of poverty with mortality didn't exist.
Now they write this U.N. declaration to fund their industry further through taxpayers they so recently impoverished. Once tasked to serve the world’s vast populations, particularly the poor and vulnerable, the U.N. vision has been consumed by public–private partnerships, the allure of Davos, and a fascination with people with high net worths.

When Words Are Used to Obscure Actions

While the declaration underlines the importance of educating children during pandemics (PP23), these same organizations backed school closures for hundreds of millions of children at minimal risk from COVID-19. Among them, several million more girls are now being farmed off to nightly rape as child brides, others forced into child labor. Women and girls were disproportionately removed from education and from employment. They weren’t asked whether they supported these policies!

The girls are being raped because the people paid to implement these policies did so. They know the contradiction, and the harm. But this is a job like many others. The only unusual aspects, from a business standpoint, are the sheer amorality and lack of empathy that must be engaged to excel in it.

To justify wrecking African children’s lives, the U.N. claims that the continent has “over 100 major public health emergencies annually” (OP4). Africa has a rising burden of endemic diseases that dwarfs mortality from such outbreaks—more than half a million children die every year from malaria (increased through the COVID-19 lockdowns) and similar burdens from tuberculosis and HIV. By contrast, total COVID-19 deaths recorded in Africa over the past three years are just 256,000. The 2015 West African Ebola outbreak, the largest such recent emergency pre-COVID, killed 11,300 people. MERS and SARS1 killed fewer than 1,000 each globally. However, induced poverty does cause famine, raises child mortality, and wrecks health systems—is this the health emergency that the U.N. is referring to? Or are they simply making things up?
Through the IHR amendments, these agencies will coordinate border closures and the locking down, mandated medical examinations, and vaccination of you and your family. Their Pharma sponsors reasonably expect to make several hundred billion more dollars from these actions, so we can be confident that emergencies will be declared. By claiming 100 such events annually in Africa alone, they are signaling how these new powers will be used. We are to believe the world is such that only the abandonment of our rights and sovereignty, for the enrichment of others, can save us.

The U.N. and the WHO do recognize that some will question this illogic. In PP35, they characterize such skepticism as “health-related misinformation, disinformation, hate speech and stigmatization.”

The WHO recently publicly characterized people who discuss adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines and question WHO policies as “far-right,” “anti-science aggressors,” and “a killing force.” This is unhinged. It's the denigration and hate speech that fascist regimes use. The reader must decide whether such an organization should control his or her freedom of expression and decide what constitutes truth.

It isn't helpful here to give details of all 13 pages of right-speak, contradiction, and fallacy. You will find similar rhetoric in other U.N. and WHO documents, particularly on pandemic preparedness. Straight talk is contrary to business requirements. However, the first paragraph in the declaration’s “Call to Action” sets the tone:

“We therefore commit to scale up our efforts to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response and further implement the following actions and express our strong resolve to:

“OP1. Strengthen regional and international cooperation, multilateralism, global solidarity, coordination and governance at the highest political levels and across all relevant sectors, with the determination to overcome inequities and ensure the sustainable, affordable, fair, equitable, effective, efficient and timely access to medical countermeasures including vaccines, diagnostics, therapeutics and other health products to ensure high-level attention through a multisectoral approach to prevent, prepare for and respond to pandemics and other health emergencies, particularly in developing countries.”

There are 48 more. You paid taxes so that someone could write that!

Those millions of girls suffering at night, the hundreds of millions of children who had their futures stolen, the mothers of those children killed by malaria, and all suffering under the increasing burden of poverty and inequality unleashed by this farce are watching. The declaration, like the WHO IHR amendments and treaty it supports, awaits the signatures of the governments that purport to represent us.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
David Bell, senior scholar at the Brownstone Institute, is a U.S.-based public health physician. After working in internal medicine and public health in Australia and the UK, he worked in the World Health Organization as program head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics in Geneva, and as director of global health technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, Wash. He consults on biotech and global health.