The COP11 Truth-Avoiding Performance in Geneva

The WHO’s eleventh Conference of the Parties (COP11) shuffled to a close in Geneva on 22 November with a result that can only be described as deeply unsatisfactory, to a very specific group of people. The most damaging proposals towards less harmful nicotine products such as vapes, heated tobacco and pouches failed to secure consensus, and from the wailing and gnashing of teeth that followed, it is clear that the mostly Bloomberg-funded NGOs who had been pushing hardest against harm reduction products were not best pleased.

What followed has been a masterclass in desperate deflection. Instead of accepting that national delegations, representing elected governments no less, simply refused to rubber-stamp policies they found extreme, unworkable, or lethal, the blame was swiftly redirected. Industry, apparently, was responsible for everything.

When a report appeared in the Tobacco Control Journal solemnly declaring COP11 a success, it was difficult to take it seriously. According to this account, the only reason certain agenda items failed was dastardly industry interference, not, heaven forbid, because those ideas were absurd, ethically indefensible, and likely to cost hundreds of thousands of lives had they been implemented. Also, it was somewhat  jaw-dropping for the authors to warn ominously about “external influence” while every one of them was employed by heavily funded anti–harm reduction organisations which had proposed the agenda items in the first place. Pots and kettles do not merely come to mind, they are so prevalent that one could form an orchestra with them. One wonders how the authors could keep a straight face while submitting it for publication.

This is a convenient story if one prefers to ignore the uncomfortable reality that COP decisions are made by Parties, not by the unelected FCTC Secretariat. And certainly not by NGOs whose influence is driven by hefty donations from private philanthropy.

Then there were the awards. New Zealand, a country whose harm reduction policies have helped more than halve smoking rates in just a few years, was presented with the first “Dirty Ashtray” award of the event. Mexico, a nation battling violent drug cartels, received the Orchid award.

Together, these choices suggested that the Bloomberg-funded Global Alliance on Tobacco Control (GATC) had finally disappeared into the warm, echoing depths of its own ideology. The notion that New Zealand is only pretending that its policies are successful requires such heroic mental contortions that one wonders whether a neurological medical team should be on standby. When outcomes contradict ideology, it seems the outcomes must be wrong.

Still, COP11 was not without its silver linings. One of the most encouraging developments was the growing number of Parties openly expressing frustration at being sidelined. In their opening statements, several delegations called for greater involvement in FCTC treaty work between COPs, a diplomatic way of saying they are tired of being locked out while decisions are shaped elsewhere. Their displeasure was clearly directed at a Secretariat and a cluster of Bloomberg-funded NGOs that appear increasingly comfortable acting as gatekeepers and usurping the Parties’ authority. That governments are beginning to notice and object can only be healthy.

The interference of heavily-conflicted NGOs at COP meetings is also being noticed by more people. David Zaruk of The Firebreak published a meticulous investigation, Mapping Bloomberg’s Billions Against Tobacco Harm Reduction, which examined the 29 WHO-approved civil society organisations admitted to the conference. Released on the morning of day two, its timing could not have been better. Delegates suddenly had a roadmap of who was in the room, who was paying them, and why the chorus sounded so eerily in tune.

So, considering the GATC accused New Zealand of pretending its policies were successful, let us talk about pretence. How can any Bloomberg-funded organisation be serious about claiming COP11 wasn’t a propaganda exercise given the participant list was littered with organisations given huge sums of money to parrot the personal whims of one American billionaire?

Among the NGOs present were the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids with 31 delegates, the European Network for Smoking Prevention with 38, the Smoke-free Partnership, 10, the University of Bath, 12, Vital Strategies, 6, and the GATC with a staggering 61 delegates.

And representing people with lived experience of smoking or quitting using consumer products? Not a single organisation. Not one. Apparently, the voices of those most affected by these policies are only to be heard at a distance, preferably from outside the building.

The European Union delegation added its own form of anti-democratic dogma to the spectacle. Leaks suggested that Denmark and the European Commission were quietly pursuing bans on vapes and nicotine pouches just one week after EU Member States had agreed a common COP11 position that did not call for global bans on safer nicotine products. The resulting recriminations have been remarkable. Reading about EU representatives attempting to throw elected member state governments under the bus to protect a deeply entrenched anti–harm reduction stance has been staggering. One can only wonder what irresistible force drove this sudden urge to protect cigarettes. Surely it couldn’t be something as crude as anxiety over declining tobacco tax revenues as Europeans quit smoking en masse? Perish the thought.

The conference concluded on a note that felt almost inevitable under the circumstances. The president of COP11 closed proceedings by incorrectly referring to novel nicotine products as bringing “disability and death.” It was a fitting finale. Cult-like disinformation delivered confidently from the podium by one of the true believers. 

The last word must go to Clive Bates, who captured the moment in a tweet that perfectly summed up the administration of COP11.

A macabre spectacle of arrogance and ineptitude, indeed. On that, at least, we can find consensus.

Let Indigenous populations make their own decisions

Following on from the previous COPWatch article about the side events to be held during breaks at COP11 (downloadable at this page), attention was drawn to a side event scheduled for the afternoon of Thursday 20th November; one which reeks of Western interference towards approaches which are working in indigenous populations.

Organised by Australia, “Implementing the WHO FCTC: Indigenous Leadership, Equity, and Community-Driven Solutions”, is quietly buried in the schedule. The only event acknowledging Indigenous leadership in tobacco control, you would expect the session to recognise the value of community-led, culturally grounded approaches. You would also expect it to highlight truth-telling and lived experience, concepts that Western NGOs love to cite but never practice when it threatens their authority. 

Sadly, our hopes aren’t that high. We anticipate that instead, it will perform a ritual of denunciation, condemning any view that challenges the WHO’s abstinence-only nicotine doctrine, as blessed by their financial patron.

COP11 exposes a grim reality that global health circles rarely admit. What should be an inclusive conversation about saving lives has instead become a showcase of philanthropic imperialism. Bloomberg Philanthropies and its network of paid mouthpieces have captured the global tobacco control narrative, turning harm reduction into heresy and Indigenous self-determination into a side note.

This imbalance is not an accident. It is the direct result of Bloomberg’s philanthropic empire, which has spent more than a billion dollars imposing its moral worldview on the Global South. Under the banner of charity, this empire dictates policy to entire nations, rewarding compliance and punishing deviation. Harm reduction advocates are branded as industry puppets, while compliant NGOs receive endless funding and access. This is not public health. It is colonialism repackaged as benevolence.

For Indigenous peoples, this interference cuts deep. Harm reduction is not about protecting corporations, it is about reclaiming autonomy. Many Indigenous communities face disproportionate harm from combustible tobacco. Safer nicotine alternatives, introduced on their own cultural and regulatory terms, offer a way to reduce disease without repeating the paternalism of the past. Yet Bloomberg’s network insists on denying these communities the right to choose their own path. They are told, once again, that Western experts know best.

This is philanthropic colonialism in its purest form. A wealthy foreign power dictating morality to poorer nations and Indigenous peoples under the pretext of saving them. The rhetoric of “protecting youth” and “defeating industry interference” has become a convenient cover for silencing inconvenient truths and suppressing local agency.

If the WHO FCTC truly values equity and participation, it must recognize the hypocrisy of allowing billionaire-backed NGOs to dominate the conversation while Indigenous voices are tokenized and marginalized. Harm reduction, when guided by communities rather than donors, is not an industry tool, it is liberation.

At COP11, the world will hear much about saving lives and protecting health. But unless it confronts the corrosive influence of philanthropic colonialism, those promises will remain hollow. The fight for tobacco harm reduction is no longer just about nicotine, it is about sovereignty, truth, and the right of Indigenous peoples to chart their own path to wellness.

Published side events are a masterclass in manipulation

The FCTC Secretariat has published the schedule for side events to be held during breaks at COP11 (It is downloadable at this page). As you might expect, they promise to be a masterclass in manipulation. 

Nearly every session that mentions harm reduction is run or co-organized by Bloomberg-funded bodies who share not only funding but also a single script. To ram home the message, the discussion descriptions routinely place the term harm reduction in quote marks to pretend it is a figment of industry imagination rather than a legitimate, evidence-based public health strategy.

The purpose of these events is rather transparent. The dubiously funded NGOs, complete with their clear conflicts of interest, get access to government officials and can lecture them with unadulterated nonsense because anyone who might criticize them is not allowed in the room.

The sessions kick off with an event organised by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (CTFK), the Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control (GGTC), and the Global Alliance for Tobacco Control (GATC), all of whom enjoy lavish funding from a prominent American billionaire we could mention. It claims it will be “unmasking” industry interference which uses “the language of “harm reduction” to promote novel nicotine products.” They intend to do so via the medium of “youth-led advocacy”, or in other words, feeding lines to kids to parrot to their captured audience. 

It is a classic of its genre to start the disinformation avalanche. All the WHO’s manufactured hobgoblins delivered to delegates out of the mouths of babes to minimize the chances of anyone objecting. The fact that many times more adults than youth use safer nicotine products to help them quit smoking will not be mentioned. 

On Tuesday, an event organised by the WHO will blur the delegates’ understanding of the policy area by describing “how flavours in tobacco, nicotine and related products” create more attractive products by “masking the harsh taste of tobacco.” Quite how this works with nicotine products which contain no tobacco and, therefore, have no tobacco taste to start with, is not explained.

Immediately after comes a session organised by CTFK and the University of Bath, both recipients of millions of dollars of Bloomberg funding, which “will explore how the tobacco industry uses the concept of “harm reduction” to preserve its market interests, shape public perception and influence policy in its favor”. Naturally, they won’t declare their own conflicts of interest or how being funded by one of the world’s most fanatical anti-nicotine advocates helps to preserve their own bank accounts and “shape public perception and influence policy” to pursue more grateful financial support in the future. 

Further on Tuesday, the Smokefree Partnership will be organising a discussion on how “the tobacco industry and its front groups are misrepresenting Sweden’s decline in smoking to promote snus and nicotine pouches.” One wonders what it has to do with the Smokefree Partnership considering snus and pouches are, indeed, smokefree. But they are just part of the groupthink agenda. It is awkward for harm reduction deniers that Sweden has recently become smokefree which is undoubtedly due to it being the only country in the European Union which is permitted to sell snus. This, despite other countries having implemented more traditional tobacco control policies which nicotine prohibitionists claim to be the reason for success. The Swedish government disagrees, but the FCTC doesn’t want to listen to governments anymore, as we commented recently.  

Wednesday begins with two more Bloomberg-funded entities, the WHO FCTC Knowledge Hub and GGTC teaming up with the Maldives, the FCTC’s latest poster child having recently banned possession of all nicotine products for everyone, including tourists, forever. They will discuss how “the tobacco industry uses “harm reduction” claims to promote new nicotine products, shape regulation and weaken the safeguards of Article 5.3”. Haven’t we heard that one already? Yes, it is almost the exact wording of a discussion sponsored by CTFK and the University of Bath the day before. 

Well, Joseph Goebbels did say that lies should be repeated for them to become the truth, so they are only following the propaganda playbook. 

Laughably, Australia is co-organising an event on the Wednesday entitled “Preventing uptake of e-cigarettes” which promises to “provide practical insights and lessons learned to support stronger protection against e-cigarette use.” It would be a good bet to assume that the problem of more than 200 firebombings and an out of control black market will be quietly ignored. 

With the side events front-loaded to mirror the aggressive nature of the COP11 agenda against harm reduction and guide delegations towards following Michael Bloomberg’s the WHO’s line on the issue, proceedings culminate with a plea for “Accelerating Article 14 Implementation.” This is the FCTC article which demands Parties “facilitate accessibility and affordability for treatment of tobacco dependence including pharmaceutical products.” After all, considering the prior aggressive rhetoric about the harms of nicotine, the delegates will need to be reminded that nicotine is apparently fine when delivered by the correct WHO corporate partners. 

We can only hope that delegates will be able to see through the WHO’s Bloomberg-funded festival of untruths and realise that recreational nicotine use is not going away anytime soon, however much the FCTC authorities might wish it possible. 

Still, we should give them some credit. It takes real creativity to plan a program of events which turn a conference designed to reduce harm from smoking into one which is desperate to protect cigarettes from all competition.