Photo: Federal Health Minister, Karl Lauterbach at the 2022 WHO Conference.

Lauterbach’s WHO Global Pandemic Treaty: Defeated, But Not Dead

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Global Pandemic Treaty is defeated for now, but mark my word, it will come back in another form. The story is not finished yet, which is why it is paramount to understand just how dangerous the proposed treaty was.

What’s in the WHO Pandemic Treaty?

In January 2022, US President Biden proposed amendments to W.H.O.’s International Health Regulations (IHR) that would eliminate all requirements for W.H.O. to consult with member governments before declaring a disease outbreak.

Supporters, including Federal Health Minister, Karl Lauterbach, say the new treaty is needed to to improve worldwide pandemic response. The new treaty, they say, will help identify outbreaks more quickly in the future and respond to them more effectively.

Alarmingly, Article 9 of the proposed IHR amendments eliminates existing requirement for W.H.O. to “consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring.”

The amendments also remove every subsequent reference in the IHR to consult with the relevant states.

This means the W.H.O. director would have unilateral authority to declare outbreaks, without any need to base its decisions on information from the concerned state party.

“We are thus underlining that this pandemic will not be the last,” said Federal Minister of Health Karl Lauterbach (SPD).

He emphasized it was necessary “to take precautions today so that you don’t get caught by surprise again tomorrow”.

What the Treaty Really Means

In reality, the WHO Pandemic Treaty is nothing but a power grab by the WHO to use public health emergencies as a way to implement transformative and totalitarian changes.

It is a most dangerous step.

The proposed changes to the IHR would give the WHO unilateral power to declare a public health emergency without consulting member states. Absurd as this sounds, this is what the treaty would make it legal for the WHO to do, and for member states to comply. This gives the WHO an enormous weapon: finger on the global mass-panic button, which it can then be lobbied in order to force preposterous measures. When people are afraid, they cannot think straight and prefer to obey. Panic mode is a relatively cheap and highly effective way to manufacture mass consent out of thin air to obtain public acquiescence and blind obedience to policies that demolish civil and economic rights. This is exactly what happened for CO-VID 19. Fear and panic were and will again be weaponized to implement the unacceptable.

With the new pandemic treaty, governments and health ministers who can be “bought” will have a wonderful excuse to make their citizens accept measures that would not pass the test of national laws. This excuse will be: “We have to follow the law, and the law is the WHO global pandemic treaty”. In this way, the treaty could make it politically possible for the government to bypass the Bundestag for approval, as well as the Basic Law, the supreme law of the land which, at least in theory, guarantees the right against forced medical treatment. For example, if the WHO, as permitted by the treaty, prescribes mandatory vaccination, there may well be no Bundestag vote as which happened on 7 April 2022 and which defeated the coalition’s Vaccination Prevention Act.

If public health is truly what is at stake, then then treaty is also exactly the opposite of what is required to manage a global pandemic. In the name of “Strengthening WHO preparedness for and response to health emergencies”, the treaty is in effect proposing an old idea, success by central planning. Look to Soviet Russia, Maoist China, communist Venezuela and Cuba for an idea of how that worked out. In times of a global pandemic, the treaty would make the WHO the sole legitimate and legal source of information. Communism could never work because it pretended the impossible – that the state alone could know best. When countries are free to set their own course instead of taking instructions from the WHO to implement a unique solution, they are solving crucial problems in times of global pandemic: the problem of incomplete information, the problem of uncertainty, the question of what measures work best, and how to learn and adjust. In other words, how to make best use of dispersed knowledge, and disparate national circumstances. What the free market achieves for economic prosperity, free, independent states achieve for global public health.

To pull through the next pandemic, read Friedrich Hayek, not Bill Gates.

Ralph Berger

Leave a Reply