GENEVA: Negotiations for a landmark global treaty to end plastic pollution descended into a tense, past-midnight standoff on Monday, with the European Union and a bloc of “like-minded countries” (LMC) led by Saudi Arabia digging in over contentious issues, nearly bringing the process to a halt.
At the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee’s fifth session (INC-5.2), the EU refused to move discussions on finance (Article 11) forward unless negotiators first tackled “upstream measures” — politically charged provisions aimed at cutting plastic production, eliminating certain products and restricting hazardous chemicals. For them, there could be no agreement on money without clarity on what it would fund.
The LMCs, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and India, pushed for “scope” — a non-article section defining the treaty’s reach — to be discussed alongside Article 6 on production and supply. Officially, scope clarifies ambition, but many believe the bloc’s real aim is to weaken the mandate from “end plastic pollution” to “address plastic pollution” and strip out human health references.
In the chair’s draft, scope is only a placeholder. EU negotiators argue giving it equal weight wastes time. “You cannot prioritise informal-informal time for something that doesn’t exist as an article,” said one European delegate. The LMC strategy linked scope and Article 6, ensuring neither advanced without the other. Opponents saw the move as calculated obstruction.
“This is not the first time we have seen an attempt to hold one part of the talks hostage to another,” said David Azoulay, Director of Environmental Health at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). “Countries have been saying for years that conversations need to advance in parallel. You cannot have just one moving while the other is blocked. The level of frustration is rising, and the pressure to deliver something is growing.”
Finance became a bargaining chip. Many Global South delegations, including India, insist a treaty without strong financing is meaningless. Article 11 would create a dedicated implementation mechanism, in addition to Global Environment Facility funding, to support production cuts and phase-outs. But the EU says agreeing to this without upstream commitments risks signing a blank cheque.
"The fault lines in the stances of different blocs have been evident since the beginning of the treaty negotiations. These emerge from decades of unequal development globally. Developed countries and polymer producers are hesitant to contribute financial resources needed for the implementation of this treaty. Yet, some of the developed countries continue to invest in oil, gas and petrochemical infrastructure. On the other hand, developing countries are not a homogenous group of countries. Some of them indeed need the financial resources to implement even effective downstream measures. Yet, other developing countries are also building their polymer and plastic manufacturing capacities. Instead of focusing on the stated faultlines, which are far more porous than they appear, countries need to focus on the objective of the treaty – eliminating plastic pollution across the lifecycle – and commit to what it takes to achieve this," said Swathi Seshadri, Petrochemicals Expert, South Asia, IEEFA.
EU environment commissioner Jessika Roswall was clear Tuesday: “The EU is ready to do a deal but not at any cost. We do like plastic… and we will continue to need it. However, we don’t like plastic pollution and it’s time to end plastic pollution as quickly as possible.” She said any treaty should give businesses the certainty of a clear global framework.
The LMCs, mostly oil-producing states, want the treaty to focus on waste management. The EU and others want to rein in production, which is set to triple by 2060, and phase out toxic chemicals.
As talks dragged past midnight, tempers flared. The EU dug in saying no finance until scope was settled and upstream measures got real negotiating time. The LMCs refused, insisting scope must come first. Delegates shuttled between huddles and tense floor interventions in what one insider called “the most action-packed session so far” — not for breakthroughs, but for procedural brinkmanship.
Danish Environment Minister Magnus Heunicke admitted the “wide gap” between camps but warned that “the work of tackling plastic pollution will only get harder the longer we wait. So now’s the time.” He added: “There’s going to be a whole lot more drama in the days to come, but our goal is this drama should end up in a deal.”
He urged all sides to examine red lines: “If we all stick to our red lines then a deal is impossible… That’s not me saying ‘a deal at any price’: Not at all. But a deal that is legally binding and has strong text and lays the ground for our work in the years ahead in order to tackle plastic pollution.”
Observers say Monday night’s standoff exposed the treaty’s central fault line. The LMCs want to limit ambition early, protecting petrochemical production; the EU and its allies want enforceable upstream measures locked in before agreeing to finance.