WHO and Brazil urge world leaders to finalise Pandemic Agreement to prevent future global health crises – UN News

In a powerful and unified plea, the World Health Organization (WHO) and Brazil have issued an urgent call to global leaders, emphasizing the critical necessity of finalizing the Pandemic Agreement. This landmark accord, currently under negotiation, is posited not merely as a response to past crises but as an indispensable shield against future global health catastrophes. The plea underscores a profound recognition that the lessons of the recent past, particularly the devastating reach of COVID-19, must translate into concrete, legally binding commitments to safeguard humanity.

The Echo of Crisis: A Global Call for Unity

The world stands at a pivotal juncture, grappling with the lingering scars of the COVID-19 pandemic while simultaneously facing an increasingly interconnected future ripe for new health threats. It is against this backdrop that the World Health Organization (WHO), the principal global health authority, in collaboration with the influential voice of Brazil, a nation with significant experience in public health challenges, has escalated its appeal to world leaders. Their message is clear and unequivocal: the time to finalize a robust and equitable Pandemic Agreement is now. This agreement is not a luxury but a necessity, a foundational element for a resilient global health architecture capable of preventing and effectively responding to future crises that inevitably loom on the horizon. The urgency stems from a collective memory of the devastating human, social, and economic toll exacted by the last pandemic, a stark reminder of the global community’s vulnerabilities when preparedness and coordinated action fall short.

The joint advocacy from the WHO and Brazil reflects a growing consensus among international stakeholders about the critical gaps exposed by COVID-19. Despite existing international health regulations, the world witnessed profound inequities in vaccine access, disjointed national responses, and a breakdown in vital information sharing. This collective experience highlighted the absence of a legally binding framework designed to foster solidarity, ensure equitable access to life-saving tools, and mandate a truly global, coordinated approach to public health emergencies. The proposed Pandemic Agreement seeks to rectify these shortcomings, aiming to create a framework that transcends national borders and political agendas, prioritizing the health and well-being of all humanity.

The Imperative: Learning from the Shadows of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic served as an unprecedented global stress test, exposing both the remarkable ingenuity of scientific discovery and the profound fragilities of global governance. Its impact reverberated through every facet of human life, transforming societies, crippling economies, and claiming millions of lives. The lessons learned, though painful, offer an invaluable roadmap for future preparedness, underscoring the indispensable need for a new international instrument. Without such a mechanism, the world risks repeating the mistakes of the past, facing future outbreaks with the same haphazard, fragmented, and inequitable responses that characterized the initial phases of the last pandemic.

Unprecedented Scale and Devastation

The sheer scale of COVID-19 was staggering. It wasn’t just a health crisis; it was an economic cataclysm, a social disruption, and a geopolitical challenge. Global GDP contracted sharply, supply chains fractured, and essential services from education to tourism were brought to a standstill. Beyond the immediate fatalities, the pandemic left a legacy of long COVID, exacerbated mental health issues, and widened socio-economic disparities, particularly affecting vulnerable populations. The rapid global spread of the virus demonstrated that a threat originating in one corner of the world could, within weeks, bring the entire planet to its knees, highlighting the futility of purely nationalistic responses in an era of hyper-connectivity.

Failures in Global Response and Equity Gaps

Despite early warnings and the rapid development of vaccines and therapeutics, the global response was marred by significant failures. Nationalism in vaccine procurement, often dubbed “vaccine apartheid,” saw high-income countries rapidly secure doses while low-income nations waited, prolonging the pandemic and creating fertile ground for new variants. Information sharing, crucial for understanding and combating the virus, was often inconsistent or delayed. The existing International Health Regulations (IHR 2005), while foundational, proved insufficient in mandating equitable access to resources, ensuring fair distribution of burdens, and enforcing accountability for collective action. These systemic failures reinforced the urgent need for a more robust, legally binding framework that can compel international cooperation and ensure equity in times of crisis.

Core Pillars of the Proposed Pandemic Agreement: Forging a Resilient Future

The Pandemic Agreement is envisioned as a transformative instrument designed to fundamentally alter how the world prepares for, prevents, and responds to future pandemics. It is built upon several foundational pillars, each addressing a critical gap identified during the COVID-19 experience. At its heart lies the principle of global solidarity and equity, seeking to transcend the self-serving nationalistic tendencies that plagued the last response and instead foster a collective approach where no country or community is left behind.

Ensuring Global Equity in Access

Perhaps the most critical pillar is the commitment to equitable access to pandemic-related products, including vaccines, therapeutics, diagnostics, and personal protective equipment. The agreement aims to establish mechanisms that guarantee fair and timely distribution, particularly for low- and middle-income countries. This involves provisions for technology transfer, local manufacturing capacity building, and transparent sharing of intellectual property, challenging the traditional paradigms that often prioritize profit over public health during emergencies. The goal is to dismantle the barriers that led to “vaccine nationalism” and ensure that essential medical countermeasures are seen as global public goods, accessible to all who need them.

Strengthening Surveillance, Early Warning, and Information Sharing

Effective pandemic prevention and response hinge on rapid and transparent information sharing. The agreement seeks to bolster global surveillance systems, enabling early detection of novel pathogens and prompt risk assessment. This includes commitments from member states to share genomic sequences, epidemiological data, and other critical information in real-time, without undue delay or political interference. Such transparency is vital for scientists and public health officials worldwide to understand emerging threats, develop appropriate countermeasures, and coordinate targeted interventions. Robust data sharing protocols, coupled with rapid alert systems, form the bedrock of a proactive defense strategy.

Fostering Research, Development, and Innovation

The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines was a scientific triumph, but the benefits were not equally shared. The Pandemic Agreement aims to institutionalize international cooperation in research and development, ensuring that innovation benefits all. This involves promoting collaborative research networks, investing in diversified R&D pipelines, and establishing mechanisms for fair benefit-sharing from research outcomes. Crucially, it also seeks to ensure that the scientific knowledge and technologies developed are rapidly and widely disseminated, avoiding bottlenecks that restrict global access during emergencies.

Building Capacity and Sustainable Financing

Preparedness is only as strong as its weakest link. The agreement calls for significant investment in strengthening national and regional capacities for pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, particularly in resource-limited settings. This includes bolstering healthcare systems, training health workforces, enhancing laboratory capabilities, and developing robust supply chains. A critical aspect of this pillar is sustainable financing – identifying dedicated, predictable, and adequate funding mechanisms to support these efforts, moving away from reactive emergency funding towards proactive investment in long-term resilience. This financial commitment acknowledges that global health security is a shared responsibility requiring shared investment.

Enhanced Governance and Accountability Mechanisms

To ensure the agreement’s effectiveness, robust governance structures and accountability mechanisms are essential. This involves defining clear roles and responsibilities for member states and the WHO, establishing transparent reporting frameworks, and creating pathways for regular review and evaluation of the agreement’s implementation. The aim is to build trust and ensure compliance, making sure that commitments translate into tangible actions on the ground. A strong accountability framework is crucial to ensure that the spirit of global solidarity is upheld, even when national interests might otherwise diverge.

Brazil’s Principled Leadership: A Voice for Equity and Collaboration

Brazil’s prominent role in advocating for the finalization of the Pandemic Agreement is deeply rooted in its extensive national experience with public health challenges and its historical commitment to global health equity. As a large, diverse nation with significant health disparities and a history of battling infectious diseases, Brazil brings a unique and vital perspective to the international negotiating table. Its advocacy is not merely symbolic but reflects a principled stance informed by decades of public health policy and diplomatic engagement.

A Legacy of Public Health Innovation and Challenges

Brazil has long been a frontrunner in public health initiatives among developing nations, boasting a universal healthcare system (Sistema Único de Saúde – SUS) and a strong tradition of vaccine production through institutions like Fiocruz and Butantan. However, it has also grappled with endemic diseases like dengue, Zika, and Chagas, alongside significant outbreaks such as H1N1 and, most recently, the devastating impact of COVID-19. This direct experience has imbued Brazil with a profound understanding of the complexities of managing large-scale health crises, from rapid diagnostic deployment to mass vaccination campaigns and the critical importance of community engagement. Its struggles during COVID-19, particularly related to vaccine access and internal political divisions, further reinforced the need for global solidarity and equitable resource distribution, rather than relying solely on national capacity.

Championing Access to Medicines and Technology Transfer

Historically, Brazil has been a vocal advocate for access to essential medicines, particularly during the HIV/AIDS crisis when it successfully negotiated for the local production of antiretrovirals, challenging intellectual property norms to prioritize public health. This legacy positions Brazil as a natural champion for similar provisions within the Pandemic Agreement, especially concerning vaccine and therapeutic production and technology transfer. The nation understands firsthand the strategic importance of manufacturing self-sufficiency and the ethical imperative of ensuring that life-saving innovations are not restricted by patents or commercial interests during a global emergency. Its consistent calls for breaking down these barriers resonate strongly with other developing nations and global health advocates, strengthening the push for a truly equitable agreement.

A Bridge Between Developed and Developing Nations

Brazil often plays a pivotal role as a bridge-builder in international diplomacy, capable of articulating the concerns of the Global South while engaging constructively with developed nations. Its advocacy for the Pandemic Agreement is viewed through this lens, aiming to ensure that the final text genuinely reflects the needs and vulnerabilities of all countries, not just those with the most resources. By actively participating in negotiations and pushing for strong provisions on equity, technology transfer, and sustainable financing, Brazil helps ensure that the agreement is not just aspirational but implementable and fair for the entire global community, reinforcing its commitment to multilateralism and a rules-based international order that prioritizes human well-being.

The WHO’s Unwavering Vision: Architecture for Global Health Security

At the heart of the global push for a Pandemic Agreement lies the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations’ specialized agency for international public health. For decades, the WHO has served as the central coordinating authority on global health matters, but the COVID-19 pandemic illuminated both its indispensable role and the significant structural and political limitations it faces in a fragmented world. The Pandemic Agreement represents the WHO’s most ambitious endeavor to date to re-engineer global health security, moving beyond existing voluntary frameworks to a more binding and equitable system.

WHO’s Mandate and Challenges During COVID-19

The WHO’s mandate is vast, encompassing everything from disease surveillance and outbreak response to health policy formulation, standard-setting, and capacity building. During COVID-19, it served as the primary source of scientific information and guidance, coordinating global research efforts and advocating for equitable access to health tools. However, its effectiveness was frequently hampered by geopolitical tensions, underfunding, and the lack of robust mechanisms to compel member states to adhere to recommendations or share resources equitably. The pandemic highlighted that while the WHO can advise and convene, it often lacks the enforcement power necessary to ensure a truly coordinated global response, particularly when national interests diverge sharply.

Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’s Consistent Advocacy

Under the leadership of Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO has been an unwavering advocate for the Pandemic Agreement. Dr. Tedros has consistently articulated the moral and practical imperative for such an accord, drawing directly from the painful lessons of COVID-19. His message has been consistent: the world cannot afford to wait for the next pandemic to build the necessary tools and frameworks. He has emphasized that a new agreement is vital to overcome the “cycle of panic and neglect” that has historically characterized global responses to health crises, where intense investment during an emergency quickly wanes once the immediate threat subsides. His personal commitment to global health equity, rooted in his background as a public health leader in Ethiopia, has been a driving force behind the WHO’s persistent diplomatic efforts to bring the agreement to fruition, framing it as a legacy for future generations.

Strengthening Global Health Architecture

The Pandemic Agreement is seen by the WHO as a cornerstone for strengthening the overall global health architecture. It is designed to complement and enhance existing instruments like the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005), providing a more comprehensive, equity-focused, and legally binding framework for collective action. The WHO envisions an agreement that not only formalizes commitments for preparedness and response but also embeds principles of equity, solidarity, and transparency into the very fabric of international health law. This reimagined architecture would empower the WHO to better coordinate global efforts, facilitate resource mobilization, and ensure that all countries, regardless of their economic status, have the capacity and access needed to protect their populations from future health threats. It represents a strategic pivot towards a more proactive, preventative, and equitable approach to global health security.

Navigating Complexities: Hurdles and Hopes in the Negotiation Process

The road to finalizing the Pandemic Agreement is fraught with diplomatic complexities and deeply entrenched geopolitical interests. While the imperative for such an accord is widely recognized, translating this shared understanding into a consensus-driven, legally binding document involves navigating contentious issues that touch upon national sovereignty, economic interests, and fundamental ethical considerations. The negotiations, therefore, represent a delicate balance between individual state prerogatives and the collective good of global health security.

Sovereignty vs. Global Solidarity: A Persistent Tension

One of the most significant challenges is reconciling the principle of national sovereignty with the demands of global solidarity. Many nations are wary of ceding too much authority to an international body, particularly regarding domestic health policies, border controls, and resource allocation during an emergency. The agreement aims to strike a balance, allowing countries to maintain control over national responses while committing to international cooperation, standardized reporting, and equitable resource sharing. The debate centers on how much power the agreement should have to compel action from member states versus relying on voluntary adherence, a tension that defines many international treaties and agreements.

Intellectual Property Rights and Technology Transfer: The Core of the Equity Debate

The issue of intellectual property rights (IPRs) and technology transfer stands as a major sticking point, emblematic of the broader equity divide. Developing nations and civil society organizations argue for provisions that mandate or strongly encourage the sharing of intellectual property, know-how, and technology to facilitate local production of vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics during pandemics. They point to the “vaccine apartheid” of COVID-19, where IPRs were seen as a barrier to equitable access. Conversely, pharmaceutical companies and some developed nations emphasize the role of IPRs in incentivizing innovation and investment in research and development. Finding a compromise that respects innovation while ensuring equitable access in a crisis is a formidable challenge, requiring innovative solutions like compulsory licensing, patent pools, or time-limited waivers.

Sustainable Financing and Burden Sharing

Who pays for global pandemic preparedness and response? This question underpins much of the negotiation. Lower-income countries often lack the resources to build robust health systems and respond effectively, relying heavily on international aid. The agreement seeks to establish sustainable and predictable financing mechanisms, moving beyond ad-hoc donations. This involves discussions about fair burden-sharing, with calls for high-income countries to contribute more proportionally to global preparedness efforts, recognizing that their economic stability is also contingent on global health security. Establishing clear funding commitments and ensuring their longevity beyond a crisis period remains a complex financial and political hurdle.

Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing: A Delicate Balance

Another contentious area revolves around pathogen access and benefit sharing. Countries where novel pathogens emerge are crucial for sharing samples and genetic sequence data, which are vital for research and the development of countermeasures. However, these countries often argue that they should receive a fair share of the benefits derived from these samples (e.g., guaranteed access to vaccines developed from their pathogens). The negotiations aim to establish a framework that incentivizes rapid and transparent sharing of pathogens while ensuring that the benefits, such as vaccine doses or technology, are equitably distributed, addressing concerns about biopiracy and exploitation.

Compliance, Monitoring, and Enforcement

Finally, the effectiveness of any agreement hinges on its mechanisms for compliance, monitoring, and enforcement. How will adherence to the agreement be tracked? What measures will be in place if countries fail to meet their commitments? These questions raise further sovereignty concerns. The negotiators are exploring various options, from peer review and voluntary reporting to more robust independent monitoring and dispute resolution mechanisms. Crafting a system that is both effective and acceptable to all member states requires considerable diplomatic skill and political will, recognizing that strong accountability is essential for the agreement to have real-world impact.

The Economic and Social Imperative: Averting Future Catastrophes

Beyond the immediate health implications, the economic and social ramifications of pandemics are vast and profound. The call for a strong Pandemic Agreement is not merely a humanitarian plea but also a compelling economic argument. The staggering costs incurred during the COVID-19 pandemic serve as a stark reminder that investing in preparedness and a coordinated global response is far more cost-effective than managing the fallout of an uncontained crisis. The agreement, therefore, represents a strategic investment in global stability and prosperity.

Beyond Health: The Ripple Effects on Global Economies

COVID-19 demonstrated unequivocally that a health crisis quickly escalates into an economic one. Global supply chains crumbled, leading to shortages and inflation. International trade and tourism plummeted, devastating industries and livelihoods worldwide. Businesses faced unprecedented disruptions, leading to widespread job losses and a surge in poverty. National economies were forced to implement massive stimulus packages, incurring significant debt that will burden future generations. The World Bank estimated the global economic cost of the pandemic in the trillions of dollars, dwarfing any potential investment in preparedness. A robust Pandemic Agreement, by mitigating the speed and severity of future outbreaks, offers a pathway to insulate economies from such catastrophic shocks, ensuring continuity in trade, travel, and essential services, thereby safeguarding global economic resilience.

Protecting Human Development and Social Fabric

The social costs of pandemics extend far beyond economic figures. Education systems were disrupted globally, setting back learning for millions of children and exacerbating educational inequalities. Mental health crises surged as isolation, anxiety, and grief became widespread. Social cohesion frayed under the strain of lockdowns and misinformation. Vulnerable populations, including women, children, and marginalized communities, bore a disproportionate burden, seeing their progress in health, education, and economic empowerment reversed. The Pandemic Agreement, by fostering a more equitable and coordinated response, aims to protect these hard-won gains in human development. By ensuring rapid access to testing, treatment, and vaccines, it can minimize disruption to schooling, mitigate social isolation, and preserve the essential social fabric that underpins community well-being, thus safeguarding societies from fracturing under the pressure of widespread illness and fear.

The Case for Investing in Preparedness: A Prudent Global Strategy

The argument for investing in pandemic preparedness is increasingly seen as a fundamental aspect of national security and economic strategy. Experts estimate that the cost of preventing a future pandemic is a fraction of the cost of responding to one. Investing in strengthened surveillance, resilient health systems, R&D capabilities, and equitable access mechanisms through a Pandemic Agreement is a prudent global insurance policy. It shifts the paradigm from reactive crisis management to proactive risk mitigation, allowing for resources to be deployed strategically and effectively before a pathogen can unleash its full destructive potential. This investment protects not only lives but also livelihoods, ensuring that the global community can continue its trajectory of development and prosperity without the constant threat of a health emergency derailing progress. The agreement provides the framework for this essential long-term investment, cementing the commitment to preparedness as a continuous, rather than episodic, global priority.

Broader Global Health Governance: Synergy with Existing Frameworks

The proposed Pandemic Agreement is not being developed in a vacuum; it is intended to complement and strengthen the existing landscape of global health governance. Specifically, its relationship with the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005) is crucial, as is its integration with broader concepts like “One Health.” The goal is to create a more cohesive and robust system, addressing the limitations of current frameworks while leveraging their strengths to enhance global health security.

Relationship with International Health Regulations (IHR)

The International Health Regulations (IHR), adopted in 2005, provide a legally binding framework for countries to prevent and respond to acute public health risks that have the potential to cross borders. They mandate reporting of certain diseases and events, outline core capacities for surveillance and response, and stipulate measures at international points of entry. While the IHR were instrumental in previous outbreaks, COVID-19 exposed their limitations. They primarily focus on reporting and technical capacities, but lack strong provisions on equitable access to countermeasures, financial solidarity, and mechanisms for accountability when countries fail to comply. The Pandemic Agreement is designed to fill these gaps, building upon the IHR by adding mechanisms for equitable access, burden sharing, technology transfer, and sustainable financing. It aims to provide the political and ethical underpinning that the IHR, as a largely technical instrument, could not fully address, creating a more comprehensive two-tiered approach to global health security.

The Concept of “One Health” and its Relevance

The “One Health” approach recognizes that the health of humans is inextricably linked to the health of animals and the environment. Most emerging infectious diseases, including COVID-19, are zoonotic in origin, meaning they jump from animals to humans. Therefore, effective pandemic prevention requires a holistic approach that integrates human health, animal health, and environmental surveillance. The Pandemic Agreement is expected to strongly incorporate One Health principles, fostering intersectoral collaboration at national and international levels. This means strengthening surveillance not just in human populations but also in wildlife and livestock, addressing factors like deforestation and climate change that drive pathogen spillover, and promoting integrated research across these sectors. By embedding One Health into a legally binding agreement, the global community can better address the root causes of pandemics, moving beyond reactive responses to proactive prevention strategies that recognize the interconnectedness of all life on Earth.

The Role of Other International Bodies and Civil Society

Effective global health governance also relies on the active participation of various other international bodies and civil society organizations. Agencies like UNICEF, Gavi, and CEPI play critical roles in vaccine distribution, innovation, and financing. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund provide financial support and economic guidance. The Pandemic Agreement aims to create a framework that can better coordinate the efforts of these diverse actors, ensuring synergy and avoiding duplication. Furthermore, civil society organizations, patient advocacy groups, and academic institutions are crucial for bringing diverse perspectives to the table, holding governments accountable, and ensuring that the agreement is responsive to the needs of communities on the ground. Their continued engagement and advocacy are vital to ensuring that the agreement is not just a diplomatic text but a living instrument that truly serves the health interests of all.

The Path Forward: Seizing the Moment for Future Generations

The ongoing negotiations for the Pandemic Agreement represent a critical juncture in global health history. The window of opportunity to translate the painful lessons of COVID-19 into a concrete, legally binding framework is narrowing, yet the urgency for its finalization remains paramount. The path forward demands sustained political will, a spirit of compromise, and a steadfast commitment to global solidarity over narrow national interests. The decisions made today will profoundly shape the health and security of future generations, determining whether the world is better prepared for the next inevitable health crisis or condemned to repeat the costly mistakes of the past.

The Critical Window for Finalization

The momentum generated by the immediate aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with the ongoing scientific understanding of infectious disease threats, has created a unique but finite window for action. As the immediate crisis recedes from daily headlines, there is a risk of “pandemic fatigue” and a return to the “panic-neglect cycle.” World leaders must seize this critical moment before collective memory fades and political priorities shift. The urgency articulated by the WHO and Brazil reflects a deep understanding that procrastination could lead to missed opportunities, leaving the world vulnerable when the next pathogen emerges. Finalizing the agreement quickly ensures that the global community institutionalizes preparedness and response mechanisms while the lessons are still fresh and the political will, though tested, is still present.

The Need for Political Will and Compromise

Achieving a consensus on the Pandemic Agreement requires significant political will and a willingness to compromise from all member states. The sticking points – particularly around intellectual property, financing, and sovereignty – demand courageous leadership to bridge divides. Nations must recognize that a truly effective agreement will necessitate some concessions from all sides, understanding that the benefits of collective security far outweigh the costs of individual compromises. This means moving beyond zero-sum negotiations to embrace a collaborative spirit, prioritizing the shared goal of protecting global health over entrenched national positions. Diplomacy and good faith negotiations are essential, focusing on finding common ground and innovative solutions that satisfy core principles while addressing practical concerns.

Potential for a Landmark Agreement to Reshape Global Health Security

If successfully finalized, the Pandemic Agreement has the potential to be a landmark achievement, fundamentally reshaping global health security for decades to come. It could represent a paradigm shift from a reactive, fragmented approach to a proactive, equitable, and coordinated one. Such an agreement could ensure that diagnostic tools, treatments, and vaccines are developed rapidly and distributed fairly, that countries are supported in building resilient health systems, and that critical information is shared transparently. It would solidify a collective commitment to protecting the health of all people, recognizing that health security is a shared responsibility and a fundamental human right. This transformative potential underscores the immense significance of the current negotiations, making the call from the WHO and Brazil not just an urgent request, but a profound appeal for visionary leadership that prioritizes humanity’s collective future.

Conclusion: A Defining Moment for Global Solidarity

The unified call from the World Health Organization and Brazil for the swift finalization of the Pandemic Agreement resonates with a deep understanding of history’s lessons and the pressing demands of the future. The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare the systemic fragilities of global health governance, revealing how a lack of preparedness, fragmented responses, and profound inequities in access to life-saving tools can devastate lives, economies, and societies worldwide. This moment is not merely about signing a document; it is about forging a new social contract for global health, one built on the principles of solidarity, equity, and shared responsibility.

Finalizing the Pandemic Agreement represents an opportunity to institutionalize the collective wisdom gained through immense suffering. It promises a framework that can transcend nationalistic tendencies, ensuring that the benefits of scientific advancement are accessible to all and that the burden of preparedness is equitably shared. The hurdles are significant, touching upon complex issues of sovereignty, intellectual property, and financing, but the imperative to overcome them is even greater. The economic and social costs of inaction far outweigh any perceived compromises.

As negotiations reach their critical final stages, the eyes of the world are on its leaders. Their decision will determine whether humanity learns from its most recent global health crisis or is destined to repeat its mistakes. The Pandemic Agreement is more than a treaty; it is a testament to global solidarity, a commitment to future generations, and a crucial step towards building a more resilient, equitable, and secure world for all.