GENEVA – The 79th World Health Assembly (WHA) convened this week under the poignant banner, "Reshaping global health: a shared responsibility." As the world navigates a complex landscape of post-pandemic recovery, geopolitical volatility, and the looming threat of future pathogens, the assembly serves as the primary theater for international health diplomacy. This year’s proceedings have been marked by a blend of sober reflection on past failures and urgent, high-stakes negotiations aimed at safeguarding the future of global health security.
The State of the World: Dr. Tedros Sets the Agenda
The assembly opened with a comprehensive report from World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. His address served as a foundational document for the week, highlighting that while the world has emerged from the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the "shared responsibility" to build resilient systems remains an unfinished task.
Dr. Tedros emphasized that the current geopolitical climate, characterized by conflict and fractured international cooperation, threatens to undo decades of public health progress. His report provided a roadmap for Member States, urging them to move beyond the reactive cycles that have historically defined global health responses. The session also saw the recognition of various nations and individuals through the World No Tobacco Day awards, underscoring the WHO’s ongoing commitment to addressing the leading causes of non-communicable diseases alongside emergency preparedness.
The Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS) Impasse
Perhaps the most significant development of the week concerns the ongoing negotiations surrounding the WHO Pandemic Agreement, specifically the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS) system.
A Critical Link in Global Security
The PABS Annex is designed to ensure that when a new, high-threat pathogen is identified, information and samples are shared rapidly with the international community. In exchange, participating countries—particularly those in the Global South—are guaranteed equitable access to the resulting medical countermeasures, such as vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics.
The negotiation of this annex is not merely a technical exercise; it is the linchpin of the broader Pandemic Agreement. Without a consensus on how to share the benefits of scientific discovery, many Member States remain hesitant to fully commit to the overarching treaty.
The Path Forward
Following extensive deliberations, the World Health Assembly resolved to extend the mandate of the Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG). The IGWG, operating under Article 12 of the Pandemic Agreement, has been tasked with finalizing the annex. Member States have set a high-pressure timeline: the outcomes are to be submitted for consideration at either a dedicated special session of the Assembly later in 2026 or, at the latest, the 80th World Health Assembly in May 2027. The next critical milestone will be the seventh meeting of the IGWG, scheduled for July 6–17, 2026.
Committee A: Managing Conflict and Emergency Preparedness
While high-level diplomacy occupied the plenary, Committee A engaged in the granular work of oversight and policy implementation. Delegates spent considerable time reviewing the status of the International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005) and the performance of the WHO Health Emergencies Programme (WHE).
Navigating Conflict Zones
The ongoing conflict in the Middle East dominated the discourse within the committee. Delegates expressed deep concern over the systematic destruction of health infrastructure and the targeting of healthcare workers, which constitutes a grave violation of international humanitarian law. The committee adopted a formal draft decision regarding the health emergency in Lebanon, signaling a unified, albeit politically charged, recognition of the necessity to maintain "neutrality and safety" for medical personnel in conflict settings.
Oversight and Accountability
The Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee for the WHO Health Emergencies Programme delivered a report that was both supportive and critical. It urged Member States to move from rhetoric to sustained, long-term funding. The consensus among delegates was clear: preparedness cannot be a "stop-start" endeavor dependent on the emergence of a new crisis.
Decade of the WHO Health Emergencies Programme: Lessons from COVID-19
A major highlight of the assembly was the strategic roundtable reflecting on the ten-year history of the WHO Health Emergencies Programme (WHE). The session brought together global leaders, scientists, and policymakers to dissect the "ultimate stress test"—the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Evolution of the WHE
Dr. Chikwe Ihekweazu, Executive Director of the WHE, opened the session by outlining how the program has evolved from a fledgling department into the backbone of global emergency response. Dr. Mike Ryan, the former executive director, provided a sobering historical context, noting that the global health architecture has consistently operated in a "reactive loop." He argued that institutions like the WHO are often forced to innovate under extreme duress because they are rarely granted the resources to act proactively during periods of relative calm.
Key Pillars of Future Resilience
The roundtable identified three critical areas for reform:
- Epidemic Intelligence and AI: Professor Johanna Hanefeld of the Robert Koch Institute noted that while advanced analytics and AI represent the next frontier, these tools are only as effective as the underlying national health systems that collect the data. Trust remains the missing variable in many regions, without which data collection and contact tracing become impossible.
- Flexible Financing: Dr. Daniela Garone of Médecins Sans Frontières highlighted the "reactive funding trap." She warned that when funding is restricted to specific disease outbreaks, the health system’s baseline capacity—such as primary care and workforce training—is neglected.
- End-to-End Countermeasures: Dr. John-Arne Røttingen of the Wellcome Trust emphasized that scientific discovery is insufficient if it does not translate into equitable distribution. The "end-to-end" approach means that from the moment a researcher isolates a virus, there must be a plan in place for mass production and global delivery.
Country Perspectives: From Theory to Practice
The assembly also showcased the practical application of these lessons. Ethiopia’s Minister of Health, Dr. Mekdes Daba Feyssa, provided a compelling case study on how the pandemic acted as a catalyst for infrastructure development. By investing in oxygen systems and lab capacity during the height of the crisis, Ethiopia has effectively strengthened its response capability for subsequent, smaller-scale outbreaks.
Similarly, the Central African Republic’s Minister, Dr. Pierre Somsé, championed the Universal Health and Preparedness Review (UHPR). This mechanism allows countries to align political, technical, and community-level actions, ensuring that preparedness is woven into the fabric of national development rather than treated as a peripheral concern.
Implications for Global Governance
The 79th World Health Assembly has reinforced a central, albeit uncomfortable, truth: the world is better prepared than it was a decade ago, but it is not yet secure. The transition from the acute phase of COVID-19 to a new era of proactive, pandemic-ready global health is hindered by three primary factors:
- The Trust Deficit: The erosion of public trust in institutions, both national and international, continues to undermine vaccination efforts and compliance with public health measures.
- Geopolitical Fragmentation: The ability of the WHO to coordinate a truly global response is hampered by the competitive, rather than cooperative, nature of current international relations.
- The Funding Gap: While billions have been pledged for emergency response, the sustained annual investment required for robust health surveillance and workforce development remains elusive.
As the assembly draws to a close, the focus shifts to the upcoming IGWG meeting in July. The success of the Pandemic Agreement, and specifically the PABS Annex, will be the ultimate barometer of whether the international community has truly learned the lessons of the past decade. If the member states fail to finalize these agreements, the world risks returning to the same cycles of reactive panic that have defined every major health crisis of the 21st century.
The message from Geneva is clear: health is a shared responsibility. The question remaining for 2026 and beyond is whether the world is capable of sharing the burden of preparedness before the next pandemic forces it upon them.
About the Author
