Thread by @DmitryOpines

1/ This is a huge symbolic win for campaigners, but it could mean a number of things depending on the Administration's strategy here and what it does next.

A quick thread on three options I can see: the straight forward, the cynical, and the screws.

https://twitter.com/AmbassadorTai/status/1390021205974003720

2/ Option #1: It is what it is.

This is 100% what it appears to be. The US negotiates a few technical changes to the waiver and signs up, likely leaving the EU, Switzerland and other hold outs too isolated to maintain opposition.

The waiver passes largely unchanged.

3/ There is heated debate about whether the passage of the waiver will mean more vaccines in the short to medium term.

I'm not really qualified to weigh in on that, but one has to believe an IP waiver could shake some progress loose somewhere, and we need that right now.

4/ Option #2: Maximum Cynicism

At the WTO, when a Member is faced with a proposal too popular to reject outright, a not uncommon tactic is to embrace its stated objective but ask a billion questions and raise a million objections on the detail... thus stalling it out forever.

5/ It's not impossible the US could adopt a variation of this strategy here.

It may not want the PR pain of blocking the waiver directly but also not want to let it through. It could therefore plan to tie this up in incomprehensible technical negotiations until the storm passes.

6/ Option #3: (#1+#2+Screws)

The barriers to actually getting more factories churning out vaccines in and for the developing world are numerous, and not limited to IP.

The US government and others are in tough negotiations with Pharma companies to address some of these.

7/ Beyond not enforcing their payments (or retaliating for their non-enforcement), pharma companies need to transfer technology, know-how, and expertise to make new vaccine factories happen.

That's a big ask to make, and any pressure that can be brought to bear helps.

8/ From the start of this process, the WTO Director General and others have positioned themselves to use the threat of the waiver, and the precedent it would set, to try and encourage cooperation from the drug companies.

@NOIweala calls this her "third way"

9/ It's possible that's what the US is doing here. This is a combination play.

It sincerely wants more factories running (#1)
It doesn't want the waiver to pass (#2)
It wants to weaponize the threat of the waiver passing to compel pharma companies to play ball (#3)

10/ Time will tell which option is the real one, or if indeed none of them are and there's something else going on here entirely.

Hopefully this thread was useful.

/end