Top News

Is the world prepared for the next pandemic?
06 May 2026

The world is still unprepared for the next pandemic, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Helen Clark have warned. They co-chaired the WHO's Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response.

Their statement comes after negotiators missed a key deadline to finalize a global pandemic treaty.

The delay is due to disagreements over how countries should share information on potential pathogens and resulting vaccines, tests, and treatments.

Urgent action needed
Treaty

The pathogen access and benefit sharing (Pabs) system must be established before the WHO's pandemic agreement can take effect.

Sirleaf and Clark said it was "deeply regrettable" that countries had not reached an agreement ahead of this month's World Health Assembly in Geneva.

They also stressed that if a new pathogen emerged today, the world would be largely unprepared for it.

Next pandemic a matter of 'when, not if'
Call to action

Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO's Director-General, has urged nations to "continue approaching the outstanding issues with a sense of urgency because the next pandemic is a matter of when, not if."

The call comes as world leaders had first announced plans for a pandemic treaty in March 2021.

However, progress has been slow due to high levels of mistrust between richer and poorer countries.

Misinformation and mistrust hinder progress
Obstacles

The progress of the pandemic treaty has also been hampered by widespread disinformation on social media. False claims that the accord shall give away national sovereignty to the WHO have been particularly damaging.

What is the disagreement about?
Disagreement

The main disagreement over Pabs is between developed and developing countries.

Negotiating blocs such as the Group for Equity and the Africa Group want a standard contract that mandates pharmaceutical firms to share any medical products developed from countries sharing dangerous pathogens with them.

However, many European nations have argued this could stifle research and development, proposing a hybrid model of mandatory and voluntary requirements instead.