Last week’s United Nations plastic treaty negotiations were supposed to result in a global treaty to safeguard frontline communities from the plastic waste crisis.

Not only did the talks fail to produce a treaty, they systematically ignored the voices of Indigenous peoples most impacted by plastic pollution—a snub which led to an act of successful defiance at one of the summit’s plenary events.

“This entire process has been a violation” of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, said Tori Cress, an Anishinaabe woman from the Beausoleil First Nation and co-chair of the International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Plastics. “We were profoundly disappointed because we were shown a complete disregard for Indigenous peoples’ rights.”

Frustration rippled throughout the one-week conference in Busan, South Korea, where delegates from more than 170 countries failed to reach a consensus on how to address the 350 million tons of plastic waste generated every year. Negotiators couldn’t cross the divide between countries that supported limiting plastic production and oil-rich countries that vehemently opposed it.

But more than disappointment, Indigenous attendees said they felt “heartache and deep pain” over how talks played out. The U.N. chair’s suggested treaty text removed references to UNDRIP and the “existing rights of Indigenous Peoples” found in earlier drafts.

“This is not just an oversight; it is a deliberate dismissal of our sovereignty, our rights, and our leadership,” the IIPFP said in a statement, which called the remaining references in the treaty to Indigenous knowledge “hollow and insulting.”

And despite being recognized as sovereign nations, Indigenous peoples weren't allowed to participate in the closed-door, country-only negotiations that made up half of the summit. Instead, sovereign Indigenous nations were relegated to civil society status: allowed to be physically present, but barred from most important discussions.

Even when Indigenous peoples were allowed to participate, they were given far less time than usual, representatives say. Indigenous groups and other non-sovereign observers were not given time to talk during plenaries, when speakers have the opportunity to address delegates from every country—even though it is customary for the U.N. chair to invite civil societies to speak.

“That’s very concerning,” said Delphine Lévi Alvarès, the global petrochemicals campaign manager at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), who has been to every plastic treaty negotiations.

In protest, representatives of IIPFP stood with their fists in the air at Wednesday’s plenary, and asked for the right for one of their elders to address the conference. “It took courage to make sure I stood there and called out the chair to give us space to speak,” said Cress, who added she was afraid the U.N. would take away their badges and observer status for disrupting the talks.

It was only after other civil society members offered their support that an elder from IIPFP was given two minutes to talk about why Indigenous people are central to solving the plastic waste crisis. “We bear the brunt of the triple planetary crisis and plastic pollution is poisoning our lands, air, waters, ice, food systems, bodies, and very existence,” said Lisa Bellanger, an Anishinaabe Ojibwe woman.

wahtasweetnish

A post shared by @wahtasweetnish

"We know that Indigenous people and our knowledge and science systems are an essential solution to ending plastic pollution,” said Cress.

Indigenous people suffer disproportionately from the plastic pollution crisis. According to a study published in the journal Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, Indigenous communities are more likely to live near polluting infrastructure like waste incinerators, and are more affected by plastic waste contaminating their traditional foods and lifestyles. The review concluded that the higher exposure highlights "the need to increase [Indigenous peoples'] engagement in environmental decision-making regarding pollution control."

While closed door negotiations at U.N. summits are fairly common, this year was the longest period of time that negotiations happened without observers present.

“Once those doors closed, how are we supposed to influence anything?” said Cress. “We need to be at that table because we can't rely on the member states to advocate for us.”

The closed-door talks also excluded the vast majority of plastic industry lobbyists—except the 17 lobbyists that came with national delegations. At least 220 fossil fuel and chemical lobbyists attended in total, according to a CIEL analysis, outnumbering Indigenous representatives by nearly nine to one.

“Indigenous Peoples already experience barriers to full and meaningful participation in these talks,” Juressa Lee, a Te Rarawa and Ngāpuhi woman from New Zealand and co-chair of IIPFP, said in a statement. “For polluters’ attendance to be marginalizing Indigenous Rights is a contradiction of the entire purpose of this meeting.”

The U.N. Environment Program did not immediately respond to HEATED’s request for comment.

Here’s are other highlights, and lowlights, from the plastic pollution summit:

• Saudi Arabia, which is basically an oil company, led the push to prevent limits on plastic. Two weeks after successfully blocking any mention of phasing out fossil fuels at COP29, Saudi Arabia struck again. The world’s number one oil exporter proposed deleting entire paragraphs about plastic production and financing, according to The New York Times. “If it wasn’t for Saudi and Russia we would have reached an agreement here,” one European negotiator told the Financial Times.

• The good news: More than 100 countries pushed back. A large coalition led by Norway and Rwanda advocated for limits on plastic production, which they called a critical part of the fight. “If you’re not contributing constructively, and if you’re not trying to join us in having an ambitious treaty…then please get out,” said Sivendra Michael, Fiji’s minister for the environment and climate change.

• Pro-plastic lobbyists were everywhere, pushing the myth of recycling. The plastics industry sent hundreds of lobbyists to sell recycling as the solution to the crisis, despite knowing for decades that recycling doesn’t work. Their goal was to push back the “tide of anti-plastic sentiment,” according to internal documents obtained by Fieldnotes and reporting by The New York Times.

• The plastic lobbyists were also huge jerks, some scientists claimed. Scientists accused plastic industry lobbyists of using intimidation to undermine their work, according to an investigation by i and SourceMaterial. Researchers said they had been verbally attacked, were filmed at industry conferences, and suffered online abuse.

• Fun fact: These are the third U.N. climate negotiations to break down this month, following the failed global climate and biological diversity summits. Because all U.N. treaties require unanimous consensus, the failures illustrate how one oil-rich country can stall progress on global public health crises.

• Despite everything, some environmentalists say this wasn’t the worst outcome. Rather than compromise on a watered-down treaty that didn’t include limits on plastic manufacturing, delegates resolved to try again in the future. “A weak treaty is a failed treaty,” said Bellanger, the IIPFP representative who protested for the right to speak on Wednesday.

Further reading:

• The plan to ensure Indigenous peoples have a voice at the UN (Grist)

• Inside the Plastic Industry’s Battle to Win Over Hearts and Minds. (The New York Times)

• Saudi Arabia Leads Pushback Against Global Plastic Treaty. (The New York Times)

• Oil giants blocked a treaty to curb plastic pollution, but countries will try again. (The Verge)

Catch of the day: Emma is sad that her mom Vanessa is leaving, but she’s putting on a brave—and unbelievably cute—face.

Want to see your furry (or non-furry!) friend in HEATED? Just send a picture and some words to catchoftheday@heated.world.