By 2024, the UN's WHO Might Gain New Powers Over America
The Biden administration, it appears, unless stopped immediately, is tee-ing up America to make it easy for the Chinese Communist Party to defeat it, and other nations, through biological warfare.
The World Health Organization (WHO), the organization that has unhesitatingly been doing China's bidding during the COVID pandemic, is reportedly now planning to orchestrate a massive new power grab to internationally control the response to any future global pandemic. The plan is apparently to make the health of Americans dependent on the whims of China -- which is both actively seeking to displace the US as the world's leading superpower and has for years been working on new means of bio-warfare.
Of course this is part of the concerning regulatory response to the pandemic which already invested virtually unlimited powers into bureaucracies and which would leverage the international system to further disperse that same authority on a global level.
It goes without saying that China would not be forced to do anything it does not want to, but the United States is another matter.
The target date for new WHO treaties is 2024.
Negotiations on new rules for dealing with pandemics will begin at the World Health Organization on Thursday, with a target date of May 2024 for a treaty to be adopted by the U.N. health agency's 194 member countries.
The target date means that Biden would be in power. You can bet that's not a coincidence. America is the nation likeliest to object and block any such agreement.
Member states have an August deadline to decide on an initial version of the pact, which is backed by WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. He is likely to be elected unopposed for a second term in May.
Despite his grotesque mishandling of the pandemic and kowtowing to China.
Because its legal nature remains to be defined, in WHO jargon the pact is an "instrument", of which there are three types -- recommendations, regulations and conventions. Of those, regulations are automatically legally binding for members unless they explicitly object.
It is not yet clear how the 2005 regulations and the new pandemic treaty might fit together.
One suggestion is that they should be complementary, so that existing rules apply to local outbreaks with the treaty response only kicking in if the WHO declares a pandemic -- something it does not currently have a mandate to do.
And that, as mentioned in the Gatestone article, is the key to the whole thing.