UN Geneva - Multimedia Newsroom : UN Geneva Press Briefing

Good morning, Welcome to the press briefing of the UN Information Service here in Geneva.

Today is Tuesday 3rd of February and we have the pleasure to have with us Shagun Care with Doctor Chique.

Sorry, I Kwazu, who is the Executive Director of WHO Health Emergencies Programme.

Maybe you want to start by introducing him, Shagun and just maybe say a word about yourself.

I don't know if all the journalists know you.

[Other language spoken]

This is only my second time here.

I work with The Who communications, working with the media team and also focused on emergencies, health emergencies, which is our topic today.

I have the pleasure to introduce Doctor Chikwe HE Kwazu, who is WH OS Executive Director of the Health Emergency Programme, and he's here to speak today about WHO health emergency appeal for this new year that we're in, 2026.

He's going to speak about the needs in the world we're seeing today and how WHO is going to respond to them.

We will be sharing his remarks as soon as he starts speaking.

You'll have them in your inbox with a link to the appeal.

And you should also expect a press release at some point.

Over to you, Chikwe.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you, Shagun and good good morning friends, colleagues.

1/4 of a billion people are living with through humanitarian crisis that strip away the basic protections, safety, shelter and access to healthcare.

In these settings, health needs are surging whether due to injuries, disease outbreaks, malnutrition, untreated chronic diseases.

Yes, access to care is shrinking.

Today, Double HO is appealing for a billion dollars to sustain the essential health services across the world's most severe emergencies in 2026.

This money will support the health response in 36 emergencies, including Gaza, the Middle East, Sudan, Ukraine, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti and Myanmar.

We are deeply worried about the vast needs and how we will meet them globally.

Already, 20/20/25 was an exceptionally difficult year.

Global funding cuts forced 6700 health facilities in 22 humanitarian settings to either close or reduce services, cutting 53 million people of healthcare.

Families living on the edge face impossible decisions, such as whether to buy food or to buy medicine.

People should never have to make these choices.

This is why today we're appealing to the better sense of countries and of people, and asking them to invest in a healthier and safer world.

When people access care where they live, families stay together and crises are contained.

Strong health systems detect threats early, stop outbreaks from escalating and protect communities across the borders.

As we know, diseases do not respect borders, be it cholera, M pox or any other emerging health threat, as we have seen ourselves over the last couple of years.

Last year, the World Health Organisation responded to 50 health emergencies in 82 countries, reaching more than 30 million people with essential services.

We supported over 8000 health facilities and deployed more than 1400 mobile clinics providing healthcare.

We coordinated the work of 1500 partners in humanitarian settings and the deployment of over 100 emergency medical teams who provided 1.8 million health consultations in over 20 countries.

And these are just not.

These are not just numbers, these are life saving interventions that we need around the world.

Unfortunately, for every emergency responded to, there were many more prevented that of course don't make the headlines and shouldn't.

Last year WHO detected and addressed over 450 public health threats through our 24/7 real time surveillance infrastructure we carry out to keep the world safe.

Health is priceless and yet it is one of the most cost effective investments that we can make.

Today, we again invite the world to invest in health.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much, Chique.

And let me now go to the questions, if any, in the room I sat with MF Arch Reuters.

[Other language spoken]

I noticed that this is down from last year's appeal, which I believe was 1.5 billion.

Why is that?

Since the needs seem to be quite great the way you described them.

Can you say how much you actually got last year?

And can you explain a bit your thinking around how much to appeal for at a time when you're under a lot of donor pressure to prioritise?

[Other language spoken]

So there are several questions in in that and important to you know, take it step by step.

Firstly, you're absolutely right.

We're asking for a billion dollars last year.

This year lastly, we asked for 1.5 billion.

Out of that 1.5 billion, about 900 million was ultimately available for the work that we did around the world.

And so this year, that's one of the reasons that we've calibrated our ask a little bit more towards what is available realistically understanding the situation around the world, the constraints that many countries have.

But the other thing is that we too have prioritised our work.

And these are not easy decisions to make.

We have we're focusing in those most in need where we can save the most lives.

The term used is called hyper prioritisation.

It sounds like a a good term, but in effect we're making some of the hardest choices we have to make.

But that's just the reality we we face at the moment.

So recognising that the needs haven't really gone down, unfortunately they've actually increased, but recognising as well that the appetite for resource mobilisation is much smaller than it was in previous years.

We're having to adjust to those realities and ask the world to give us what we think is a realistic amount to do the work that we have to do in some of the hardest contexts around the world.

[Other language spoken]

You said you were worried about the, the vast needs and, and how you're going to meet them.

Can you, can you say a little bit more about what that, what that might entail and how that might shape up over 2026?

And, and secondly, the financial climate in terms of donate, you know, donations from countries, it doesn't look that much different in in 2026 from how it looked in, in 2025 S will it?

How are you practically go about trying to get this this billion dollars?

Will you will you be looking to new donors or will you be tapping hard on the shoulders of existing ones?

[Other language spoken]

Very important questions you asked.

I wished I could report to you that the needs are reducing.

This is why our director general always starts these comments with asking the world to really push harder towards peace, push hard around the conflicts around the world, because you know, we literally have to pick up the pieces.

We very often don't have a direct influence on the cause of this challenges, unlike the work we do in the infectious disease space.

That is more within our gift to intervene on work around the humanitarian and conflicts around the world.

We pick up the consequences of the conflict.

So we continue to advocate in all this context for our leaders and the world leaders to really work harder towards peace so that the need for response in this context reduce.

Unfortunately it's not what we're seeing at the moment and therefore we are left with these countries and regions in the world where we have to keep intervening, not out of charity, literally out of global solidarity and recognising if we don't do the work that we have to do, we need to do, we live.

We will live with even further and deeper consequences that arise from non intervention.

So really that's why we have set up this appeal.

We have adjusted the way we work significantly using a lot more local partners in the actual implementation of the work in the field.

So we work with 1500 local partners, really enabling them to do a lot of the front line work, but providing them the access, the resources, the commodities, the training, the coordination, the standards that they need to deliver on that work.

So really our role is very unique and very specific in that space.

The second question you asked was about how we will go about asking for the resources that we need to do this life saving work.

The process starts today with the appeal that we just launched, just came out of that with our Director general.

The immediate response was quite encouraging.

Many countries already promised to continue doing, giving strong messages of solidarity to continue.

Some even asked offered to do a little bit more.

We will now follow up with each of them to on their promises.

But definitely there are many countries around the world that we think can and should do more to support these contexts, recognising that we all benefit from a more peaceful world.

So I don't think the answer is one or the other.

[Other language spoken]

We are grateful to all the traditional donors that have supported the work we do and we'll continue to engage with them.

But we really have to reach out to many others that benefit from the work that we do to give a little bit themselves in support and solidarity for those efforts.

Thank you, Catherine.

[Other language spoken]

Doctor, could you please give us some names of countries that propose to give even more than they used to to do?

[Other language spoken]

So beyond fair, Catherine.

Thanks for the question.

I I suspected it would come up once I I say that, but I think give us some time.

[Other language spoken]

We this really literally, I'm coming exactly from that meeting to this room.

So let's follow up on that, see how it evolves.

Countries that sometimes speak the loudest don't do the most.

So let's manage the situation and give really recognise those that actually put the resources where their mouths are.

So give us some time as we evolve the situation and see where the resources come from.

Thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

I'm allowed since it's a quite a light agenda today.

[Other language spoken]

I was wondering, you've had to scale back a bit.

Are you drawing down the appeal sort of across the board or there's some health emergencies or countries that that you're just having to say we can't do this anymore?

And then the second question is obviously the US has withdrawn from the organisation, but they have in the past given voluntary funding via this WHO emergencies track.

So I think it's a different track.

Do you still hold some hope that they could still be a donor for the emergencies programme?

[Other language spoken]

Maybe linking back first to the question the the last question, the, you know, our traditionally the top emergency donors last year just to put the facts on the table where the EU, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Japan, Italy, UK, the EIB and the Asia Europe Foundation in in that broad order.

So and so those are the ones we call are traditional donors and we'll keep going back to them.

So actually for the humanitarian appeal specifically, you'll notice that the US wasn't one of the largest donors.

Generally, we've always been supportive and encouraging for the support they've provided.

Last year they provided 29,000,000 for a contingency fund for emergencies, which is a very important flexible fund that we mobilise to for the initial response to any crisis where we're responding to.

So grateful for all the support.

In terms of how this effects our decisions to respond, every decision to respond to deployed oblator resources efforts is always based on need.

It's never based on any geopolitical consideration unless for some reason we do not have access to that context.

But whatever decision we make on where to respond, with what resources, how fast, with whom, depends exactly on our identification of the problem, our assessment of the size and scale of that problem and the opportunity that we have to respond.

In terms of your final question on our anticipation of EU SS ultimate decision, I mean, that decision obviously lies with them.

Our Member States are currently considering this and this will culminate in the World Health Assembly in May.

But you know, we're a member state organisation.

Our doors will always be open.

It's up to those Member States that to decide to stay together, work together in solidarity.

The the reasons WHO were was the reasons our member State came together in the 40s to form the organisation are still very valid today.

And we suspect and hope that they will continue seeing the value of working in solidarity with each other and what we provide at here in Geneva and in our offices around the world as the Secretariat to enable that ultimately and the member states themselves decide what they want from from each other and from us.

Thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

I don't see a question on the platform.

[Other language spoken]

In in recent years, we've seen outbreaks of things like mpox, Ebola, COVID.

If if you don't get this billion pounds and it leaves, leaves gaps, does it leave the world more vulnerable to epidemics and pandemics?

It absolutely does.

And that's exactly the reason why the work we do is so important in identifying these challenges early, responding to them and managing the future.

And the one of the outbreaks we mentioned, epoxy emerged in in the 70s re emerged in Nigeria in 2017.

We did not pay attention sufficiently to it.

Globally, we had a, a big outbreak that was then declared a public health emergency of international concern, a second one.

[Other language spoken]

So these things don't necessarily go away.

Our work is consistent.

We work on identification, we work on supporting, working with industry for with member states to develop countermeasures, make those countermeasures available, such as vaccines.

Mpox is one of the examples where there is a vaccine available that is prized in a way that is unavailable to many countries where it is needed.

So it is work in progress.

So imagining that these challenges will somehow disappear without global solidarity, it's wishful thinking.

We have a lot of lessons to learn from the COVID pandemic in terms of how to keep building the systems, and the WTO has responded by improving our capacities in many different ways.

There's a new hub for pandemic and epidemic intelligence in Berlin, and you buy a hub.

Many countries are also building their health security infrastructure in so many different countries.

[Other language spoken]

They have a new Institute for Health Security, just met with the delegation from Singapore, have a new public health agency.

So both at the national level and at the global level, we're all looking to how to improve, not de escalate our facilities.

So if if single countries choose to go in the other direction, the consequences might be not only severe for them, but severe for the world.

We have a question from the New York Times, Nick.

[Other language spoken]

I wonder if I could just press you a little bit more on the casualties of your process of hyper prioritisation.

What emergencies are you not dealing with that you would ideally be addressing?

We don't see any reference in the list that you gave to Afghanistan and Yemen for example, which have considerable need.

So could you just get into a little bit more about the casualties of the cuts?

[Other language spoken]

So thanks Nick, very important question.

You asked if you listen to the have the opportunity of listening to what I said during the launch of the appeal this morning, you would actually see specific references to the countries that you just mentioned whether it's Afghanistan or Yemen.

So we're very much still working very hard in those contexts.

Of course circumstances are difficult and sometimes access is limited.

So, but we, we haven't dropped the ball on any of them where we have access to, to be honest, what we have done is in each of those contexts maybe not done as much as we would like to do simply because of the resources, the limited resources that we have.

So, but broadly we have one withdrawn from any crisis.

We prioritise them, we push for resources and sometimes we have more resources to respond to one than the other and we have to manage within that context.

And that's why we also very often ask not only for not only is the amount of resources important, but the flexibility of those resources so that we can make.

Decisions based only on the on need.

We don't want to make decisions on where to save a life based on who is funding that life to be saved.

So one important aspect of the resources that we get is the flexibility of those resources.

So the prioritisation, the hyper prioritisation just means that within those contexts we have to really make hard decisions, operational decisions.

We never make them from Geneva or from Brazzaville.

We leave those decisions to be made by the colleagues working on the ground for them to decide where are the limited resources needed the most.

And also, this is what the world expects of us because we work in this very interesting continuum where we're providing care, but we also hope that in each of those contexts that they are able to develop again, recover, gain resilience and continue on their developmental journey.

So we, we always have to be careful not to take over completely the the provision of healthcare services because the consequences of that is dependent.

So we have to always thread a very thin line of providing care where it is needed the most, make sure that those services are accessible, but also at the same time encourage the continuous development of the people, the resources, the capacities that are often found locally to be ready to for the recovery journey.

And I hope that that's the intersection that we're able to get to in Gaza, for instance, in the next few months, given the slight array of hope that we're seeing evolve in that context.

Thank you very much, Doctor Chikwatsu.

We thank you for coming here and this important day and this important launch.

[Other language spoken]

Yes, with the follow up.

Thank you for coming and thank you to Shagun for accompanying you.

I think if you have, he has to go at 11:00.

Sorry.

All right, but Christian is coming back.

If you have other questions for WHO afterwards, Thank you very much for for coming and briefing the journalist at the UN here in Geneva.

We'll now go to our second topic with IFRC.

Tomaso has brought us Pierre Chimer, Deputy Regional Director for Africa.

Please do tell us about the situation in Sudan, another dire situation.

And then if you have more questions for Christian, he'll come back after.

Yeah, you'll come back.

You want to start?

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much for being with us.

Pierre, let me start immediately by giving you the floor.

I think you're briefing on Sudan this morning.

Thank you so much and thanks for having me.

So I'm here to marked the point for the 100 days since the escalation of the conflict in Al Fashir and to give you some update about what we know on the consequences of what has happened.

Because today marks exactly 100 days since the escalation of the conflict and 100 days of fear and displacement, which followed 500 days of siege of Al Fashir.

So now it's 100 days in which civilian have paid the highest price.

So we as IFRC remain extremely concerned, of course about this situation.

We're not the only one.

And especially for the internally displaced people in Sudan and of course, the ongoing conflict in the country, which is certainly the worst humanitarian crisis in the world today.

And we have seen in Al Fashir, shocking trauma, shocking violence as well.

People have lost loved ones, homes have been destroyed, women raped and families torn apart.

A city once full of life has been reduced in a city where people are forced to flee, and often with nothing else but clothes on their back.

So that's complete human despair that has been witnessed in Al Fashir.

Many have fled as you may know in Tawila which is 50 kilometres.

But over went to Marit and we have thousands of people who started this unconceivable journey of 1000 kilometres to the city of Dhaba where we have 20,000 displaced people there.

So allow me to share the words of one of them.

Fatima 45 year old woman who fled Al Fasher.

So I caught.

We dug tunnels on the ground to protect ourselves from the shelling.

Even at nights we could not use any lights because drones might target us.

Food became scarce.

People were eating animal food.

[Other language spoken]

Umbas, which is a residue of peanuts, not for human consumption.

And when we left El Fashir, we went four days without food.

We saw people dying from starvation.

So that's give you a sense of the horrific situation that these people have been experiencing and facing.

And she describes how many documents and valuables were torn from them.

And those who could not afford a donkey or a car were forced to walk during this time.

So the situation in Alpha share today remains catastrophic.

Humanitarian operation are largely on on hold.

As you know, access is extremely constrained in the city.

We still have the Sudanese Red Crescent, which is our member as International Federation of Red Cross Red Crescent, who has been scaling up its response in the in the displacement side, Tewila, Malitz and Dubai especially and walking around the clock since 100 days.

So in Tarila, for instance, hosting today 1,000,000 displaced people.

We have over 300 Sudanese Red Crescent volunteers providing first aid, psychosocial support or distributing foods.

We are working in this dhaba camp I mentioned that is 1000 kilometres from Al Fashir.

So what we observe there is of course, you know, a situation of daily survival modem and and the families who are torn apart are being helped also to reconnect with their loved 1 And that's the hardship of displacement.

How can I reconnect with family members and those who have no news from for a long time and and these simple tools that mean everything when you're searching someone and but the challenge remain.

Of course, you know, Fatima, I was coaching just previously she mentioned to us that she's sharing A1 bedded tent for other families with other families.

Sorry.

And they're forced to share blankets.

So that's this kind of basic means which are which are lacking them.

So as the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Society, we really try to basically to rise to this, to this challenge.

We have been trying for a long time.

When you ask some of the volunteers and among the people who fled, some of them became volunteers.

And that's the pattern that we have seen in Sudan.

Many of the people who are helping others are themselves affected by the crisis for some time.

And definitely the, the keyword that come in everyone's mouth is peace so that everyone can go home.

So it's why from our side, you know, the conflict must end and civilian and humanitarian workers must be protected.

That's our main call.

You may remember back in October, we had five volunteers of the Red Crescent who were killed in line of duties.

So out of the 21 actually volunteers who have been killed since the beginning of the conflict in, in Sudan.

So our message is clear, humanitarian are not a target and we must be able to reach those who needed to access remain 1 main concerns and an access that has not been easy in alpha share.

But again, we are working with volunteers who are coming from the communities.

So they are already inside, right.

So that's enable somehow to to find solution beyond alpha sharing in itself.

So our last point may be to speakers who about Cordofan because what has happened in Alpha Share Main may be reproduced to a certain extent in in Cordofan and where we have a deteriorating situation, especially in the South and highly volatile environments.

And again, we have our Sudanese crescents volunteer will continue to support affected communities where access is possible.

But we recognise that many are beyond reach.

So we are closely assessing the conditions on the grounds for this safe access.

And we really call upon the international community to put an end to this ongoing conflict and ensure that humanism organisation can do what they exist to do, which is save lives and but also to to restore hope.

I would like to finish on that.

You know, after three years of conflict, almost three years of conflict in East Sudan, what people aspire is not only to be the recipient of AIDS.

They also want to be in a condition to lead a productive life as well and to be able to look at more durable solution than a constant presence that is a daily hardship.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much, Pierre Kramer, for this remarks.

[Other language spoken]

I'll start from the right Christian.

Thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

German Press Agency.

You said that the situation in Al Fascia is catastrophic and access is extremely constrained.

Does that mean you do have some access?

Can you tell us what what the Red Crescent, Sudanese Red Crescent is actually able to do inside or whether you can get any supplies to be distributed inside Al Fascia?

[Other language spoken]

All right.

We have not been able to go to to Alpha Share.

We, we still have volunteers there in the city.

But in terms of coordination, in terms of basically being able to organise a response, we have not been able to do that.

And we're dealing more with the consequences of what has happened in Alpha Share again in the displaced camps.

So that's where our information is and where our focus is as well in terms of humanitarian response.

Thank you very much, Dasan.

Thank you for the information provided.

Are you able to access the besieged area in Cordovan?

Do you have any communication with RSF?

[Other language spoken]

Now in Sudan, as you may know, we have a branch in all the 18 provinces including Gordofan.

So that's where the operation can be, can be organised.

So, so the contact with any, any armed groups has been managed basically by these branches because they're coming from the communities we're talking about.

They're able to talk with the different de facto authorities if needed and, and to ensure this operational continuity, including in Cordofan.

But I will not hide that of course, you know, the information is still quite scarce and, and the access is complicated in some areas.

Again, we have certainly thousands of people who are being reached today in Cordofan as well.

[Other language spoken]

I would like to know if the the because you said that in Kordofan the access is limited to.

So I wanted to to know if the conversation with the with the authorities there is similar in Kordofan and in Alfasher, if they access it's similar or what is the the respond of or if you have any requirement imposed by the authorities to get access there?

[Other language spoken]

Yeah, access need to be negotiated.

You're right.

And, and it's true that we still face some challenges, especially when the conflict is especially intense.

And in that regards, the main, the main objective for us is also the duty of care for our volunteers not to be exposed again.

I mentioned that we lost 5 volunteers back in October in very difficult situation where they were presenting their budget of the Red Crescents.

So, so that's one area where we try to avoid pushing too much.

Of course, we need the protection of volunteers first.

We really paid a half price and Sudanese like Crescent paid a half price in, in Sudan.

And and yeah, it's a sort of daily negotiation on which, you know, it's always complicated to to go into details.

But yeah, access is an issue, right.

So access is complicated not only because you don't have the allowance from the authorities because, but also because there is an ongoing danger because of the attacks is not helping.

And again, I'm talking of volunteers who have been themselves already affected by the conflict in their own family.

And, and in that regard in, in this kind of situation, we have been really trying to ensure this negotiation.

And again, we have directors of local branches which are well connected with the groups that can be in Cordofan and, and try to negotiate this kind of access working with the federation, but also the ICRC of course in that regards.

And, and yeah, we, we try to, to manage situation where we have a sort of 0 tolerance for additional loss of these people.

And, and again, they are the one who has been on the front line and sometimes the one who are not so much recognised or promoted the way they should be.

They are the one doing the work basically.

Thank you very much.

Any other question for Kremer Online?

No, I don't see any.

So thank you very much for coming and putting the spotlight on this terrible crisis.

Really, we we need to hear and and continue hearing the situation involves and thank you very much for your work.

Oh, I'm sorry, John.

[Other language spoken]

I don't know if it's for you, John.

Franz Foncat.

[Other language spoken]

It's for Pierre.

Thanks very much.

[Other language spoken]

I was wondering if you could bring us up to speed what your national chapters and the IFRC are doing in the crisis in West and Central Africa, especially Northern Nigeria.

So I mean in you mean in, in some area where we have armed conflict.

So of course there this national chapter that's is for example the Nigeria across is quite active a little bit the same pattern as we have in Sudan.

Again, we have local branches and, and we're not enough insisting on the fact that we have this very local response capacity through the national society very close to the reality being part of the communities we're talking about and and able to play this kind of mediation role occasionally and to negotiate access occasionally.

They are the best one to negotiate access and, and and then we have basic humanitarian operation in there.

I'm talking about North Nigeria, but it can be also N Benin for example, where we have movement population as well ongoing.

Of course, we're all facing a sort of funding shortage, but let's say for them it's not an option.

Whether there is money or not, they will be there to stay.

They will not be in and out to a certain extent.

So, so yeah, I would say it's basically humanitarian action.

But in this conflict area, and I mentioned Sudan as well, we should really measure the trauma that it has created, which is a deep trauma, meaning that basically we should have a sort of Marshall Plan for, you know, mental health of this population.

Because to be in the road of resilience, this need to be to be really addressed.

And the presence of this volunteer is already an agent of resilience in this area.

So I'm not so specific John, but happy to provide more detail update about what we are doing in in this part of Africa.

And I see Tomaso nodding.

So we'll they'll get back to you with more details, John.

And also for the notes, Pierre's notes.

Yeah, thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

Thanks also to Tomas, of course, for coming with Pierre.

So that's I think I haven't forgotten, but I think there were more questions for Christian.

Is that the case, Robin?

Still, can you come to the podium, Christian?

Hi, Christian, Thanks for jumping in.

If you could just give us a few details on the on the executive board, if you could point us towards any particular things to highlight or look out for during the week plus as well of course the when the discussions on Argentina and the USA is notification of withdrawal might come up on what we may expect there.

[Other language spoken]

Yeah, thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

Here's the opportunity to to come back to the last briefing we just had the the recordings from this morning's launch, which was at 8:15 at W Joe and the link to the, to the speeches we'll share together with the press release that was mentioned that's coming out later today.

So just don't know whoever's interested in listening to this when you don't find it on the if you don't find it on the web yourself, we'll share it later.

So to your questions on the EB, look there there's a, there's a big, a long agenda for this whole week and maybe even including some night sessions and the annotated agenda.

But let me just give a, a bit of a summary.

What's what's coming up these days?

So we have, because the political discussions unfortunately seem to be pushing high in the, in the, in the public sphere, but we have actually many, many important topics that the EBD executive board is tackling.

So you have, for example, the reports on the prevention and control of non communicable diseases, mental health, communicable diseases, universal health coverage, Primary Health care, substandard and falsified medical products, antimicrobial resistance and digital health among others.

All those will be on the agenda.

Then the Board will also hear reports by the DG on West Joe's work in health emergencies, including of course to the response in 2025 to 43 health emergencies across 74 countries and territories, then specific on health conditions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including E Jerusalem and W Joe's support in the health sector in Ukraine.

[Other language spoken]

This EB session also includes discussions on W Job governance reform, the financing and implementation of the programme budget that was discussed last week, and updates on human resources, including the prioritisation and realignment process that we all went through in last year.

In 2025 included also the reform of the global health architecture and the UNAT initiative.

So a very loaded agenda.

I would not be in a position not wanting to prioritise any of of this.

They're all really important for the work of the organisation.

And then the topic you mentioned about the notification by 2 Member states of their intention to withdraw, that has been put on the agenda for Friday.

And if you noticed yesterday, I think the Chair made a decision to separate those two items that the item with the two countries.

So make 2 separate items out of them, one on the US, one on on Argentina, but that's all we know discussion.

And whether they do it on Friday or pull it earlier or suspended or take it later, that is entirely up to the to the member states.

But for now, it's on the agenda for Friday and separate issues.

[Other language spoken]

Hi Christian, I just was hoping for an update on medical evacuations from Gaza since Rafa has opened.

[Other language spoken]

What's the number to date and why isn't it more and what are your expectations going forward?

[Other language spoken]

So yesterday on on 2nd February, W Jo and partner supported the medical evacuation of five patients and seven companions to Egypt via the Rafa crossing.

It was the first medical evacuation through this route since sometime in 2025.

After that ceasefire, W Jo's role focused on ensuring the safe transfer of the patients from Gaza, Gaza to the rougher crossing.

Yeah, that's that's that the, the process is a, is a is always a lengthy process.

And of course, 5 patients is fantastic for the five patients.

And every single patient who manages to get out is important given the medical situation in in Gaza.

But it's always important to note more than 18,500 patients in Gaza still require specialised medical care that is currently not available in this trip.

So 18,500, we managed to get 5 out, which is again fantastic, but obviously we need many more.

It's a start of a process there.

It was also, as the authorities announced a test, if it works, we all believe it did work so far and we're hoping this is increasing and turning into really a process where many more of those who need evacuations can actually leave.

Just to follow up, how are you prioritising given the extent of the needs?

[Other language spoken]

And if you have any details on what the first five were suffering from, that would be helpful.

[Other language spoken]

I do not have details on these, these five with me.

No, but we W Joe, we are not making selection on the patients, the selections made by the health authorities on the ground.

They select, they suggest these patients in a priority list to the to the security authorities and then that's the first step nearly to get security clearance through rougher.

And then then it comes to WTO when we help and organise the transfer and notify the families and so on and so forth.

So it's the decision is with the authorities on the ground.

[Other language spoken]

Christian, could you specify the main medical conditions that require the education, the evacuation of those 18,000 people?

What are the main reasons I would need to speculate now I do not have a list with me here, but that can that can be all that can be heavy trauma, trauma, wounds, of course, resulting from the war.

That can be chronicle conditions, cancer, diabetes, when serious state would help is not available in Gaza anymore.

We know that patients have died basically waiting for evacuation.

And that's something which is horrible when, you know, just a few miles or kilometres outside that border is help available.

It used to be available inside.

But even when in, if it's only available outside E Jerusalem, for example, and cannot be reached for political reasons, that's that's horrible.

And people lost their loved ones just for that pure reason.

Please, thank you, Alessandra.

What about amputations?

I don't have details with me now, but it depends if it's a severe amputation which needs medical care because maybe inflammation and serious conditions coming with it, sepsis and what have you, then that could be a reason.

But I can't speculate now which which is a reason for evacuation.

Not there's a certainly a triaging that the authorities are going on, but you can see 18,500 waiting 5 managed to get out.

Too many stayed behind that that's not just a math.

It's it's a human disaster for those having to wait.

But let's not focus now for a moment on those who have still to go out.

But let's celebrate the success and hope that we can increase the, the flow and come back to a continuous evacuation.

Hundreds of patients used to go out of out of the crossing before the conflict on a daily basis and for a good reason.

And they need, we need to come back to that.

And if I may, which countries are willing to accept them?

Because we've seen that there's an issue about now about countries accepting them.

That's indeed one of the bigger challenges or one of the challenge in the line.

So first the selection, then the security clearance and then of course, you need the countries to accept.

In this case, it, it was Egypt who, who accepted.

And that's of course fantastic.

Think of.

So Ireland had a had a patient coming, but we need more and more countries to step up and help.

These are the the, the most vulnerable you can imagine coming out of a conflict like this and in a medical condition that doesn't find any support or any help inside Gaza.

We would wish many more countries come forward and help on that front.

I don't see either hands up or on the platform.

Thank you very much, Christian.

You can stay, just have a couple of announcements for our journalist.

I've been asked to inform you about the upcoming meeting, the CSG on this Saturday.

So the third part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, what is called SIN C53 to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment, will take place this Saturday, 7:00 February, at the Geneva International Conference Centre.

[Other language spoken]

Regional consultations are planned for the morning at the same venue.

Following the resignation of the former Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, the Committee's Bureau met on 30th October and agreed to reconvene the fifth session for a one day in person meeting to elect a new Chair and fill any Vice Chair vacancies.

As this resume session is procedural and focused on organisational matters, no substantive negotiations will take place on this occasion.

The Plenary can be watched remotely as it will be live streamed by our colleagues of UN Web TV or UN TV and no press briefing is expected following the meetings.

If you have any requests that you can send it to the Unet Media team at the address that we have distributed.

I think you have already heard about this meeting by Alejandro, who can also, of course, being asked for more details.

And as I said, that's on Saturday at the ICGCICG.

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women is reviewing today the report of Vietnam.

The other countries they're going to look at is Iraq are Iraq, Lithuania, Netherlands, Argentina, Czech Republic, El Salvador and Risotto.

And this morning the Conference on Disarmament is holding a public plenary meeting, which is the first one under the presidency of Mrs Davasurengrama of Mongolia.

And, and that is what I had for you.

If not, if it's not for the fact that tomorrow is International Day of Human Fraternity, we have distributed this picture of the, the statement of the Secretary General.

We really need human fraternity at this moment.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

Is there any other question for me or for other colleagues?

I don't see any, so thank you very much.

Just wanted to say that Matt Bannon from the UNAP is going to come to Geneva a few days earlier.

So if you have any question about the meeting at the SCICG, let me know.

He will be here in Geneva and will be able to answer your questions.

Thank you very much.

Have a nice afternoon.

UN Geneva Press Briefing - 03 February 2026