Here is the rewritten content, which is both plagiarism-free and unique:
GENEVA (AP) — Following the unprecedented lockdowns, economic disruptions, and immense loss of life caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, global leaders pledged to improve future responses. Yet, years later, a definitive plan remains elusive. The World Health Organization (WHO) and nations worldwide have struggled to agree on a comprehensive strategy for handling future global outbreaks.
The final round of talks to finalize a "pandemic treaty," involving governments and advocacy groups, is set to conclude Friday. The treaty aims to establish guidelines for the WHO's 194 member countries to prevent future pandemics and improve resource sharing. However, experts caution that there are few repercussions for non-compliance.
In 2021, WHO member countries tasked the agency with overseeing pandemic agreement talks. Envoys have worked tirelessly in recent weeks to draft an accord ahead of a deadline: ratification at WHO's annual meeting. Yet, significant disagreements threaten to derail the process.
Recently, U.S. Republican senators criticized a draft of the treaty, accusing it of focusing on issues like intellectual property rights and empowering the WHO. They urged President Biden not to endorse it. Britain's health department stated it would only support an accord if it served the UK's national interests and respected national sovereignty.
Many developing countries argue that it is unfair to expect them to provide virus samples for vaccine development but then be unable to afford the resulting vaccines and treatments. This sentiment was echoed by Sara Davies, a professor at Griffith University, who noted that the treaty fails to consider political realities.
The draft treaty aims to address the gap between COVID-19 vaccine access in rich and poor countries, which WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom called "a catastrophic moral failure." It suggests that WHO should receive 20% of pandemic-related product production and urges countries to disclose deals with private companies.
Despite these efforts, experts like Adam Kamradt-Scott from Harvard University emphasize that the treaty lacks mechanisms to enforce compliance. However, similar to global climate agreements, it could create a forum for countries to hold each other accountable.
Roland Driece, co-chair of WHO's negotiating board, clarified that the treaty is not about imposing rules but about establishing guidelines for cooperation during pandemics. Suerie Moon from Geneva's Graduate Institute stressed the need to define WHO's role during pandemics and prevent future global outbreaks.
Some countries are taking independent steps to ensure cooperation in future pandemics. President Biden's administration announced plans to assist 50 countries in responding to outbreaks, providing leverage for critical information or materials.
Yuanqiong Hu from Doctors without Borders emphasized the need for countries to improve, as relying solely on them is concerning. Despite uncertainties, focusing on the lessons learned from COVID-19 could improve future responses.