Baku climate summit: rich and poor countries sharply criticize the ambiguity of the agreement on financing climate change

“Do not forget what is​ at stake!”… The UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, launched one of his angry harangues to the ⁢delegates of the almost 200 countries participating in the final phase of the COP29 negotiations​ in Baku, dubbed ⁣the “financial summit”, adn ⁤in which an agreement on economic aid to⁤ the least favored ‍countries is eagerly awaited, measures mitigation⁢ and adaptation to​ climate⁤ change.

Developing countries anticipate a figure estimated at one trillion dollars per year (950,000 ‌million euros). Developed countries appear willing to offer between 200 and 300 billion a year‍ in direct aid,‌ as well​ as private financing and new taxes. The COP29 presidency shocked everyone by ⁤leaving the disagreement number at a notable “X” in the last draft of the final ⁤text.

All together they denounced the “ambiguity”, the lack of‍ ambition and even the “insult” ⁤contained in that⁢ mystery. The ​commotion was such that the⁣ presidency of Azerbaijan had to issue⁣ a‍ statement justifying the absence of a definitive ‍number such as the New Collective Quantified Goal (NSQG), which was the goal of this COP29 which started on November 11⁣ and which is ⁣expected to exceed‌ the Objective announced on November 22nd.

“The following text will be shorter and will present a set of numbers‍ as a financial target that can serve as a landing zone for a consensus,” the official statement reads. “We are reaching the end game and believe there⁢ is progress in sight. ⁢Everyone must now participate in the process of reviewing the text to ⁤make the enterprising decision we need.”

The result is starting to look like ⁤a sequel to COP28 in Dubai, in which the invective against Sultan Al Jaber,​ who was simultaneously occurring ‌executive director of the oil company ADNOC and president of the climate summit, intensified.Al ‍Jaber suddenly disappeared from the ‌map in the last few hours and​ saved the situation “in extremis” with ‍an agreement to ⁤”abandon fossil fuels” approved unanimously.

On that occasion, antónio Guterres lost his temper and didn’t stay‌ for the final fireworks. The UN Secretary General, however, seems ready to give his all this time. “Failure is not an option,” he said⁤ Thursday. “Increased ‌(climate change) funding is essential. in ​the midst of current geopolitical divisions and uncertainties,‌ the⁢ world needs ​countries to stand together.”

“This ⁢is not a zero-sum game,” ⁤Guterres⁤ stressed. “The funding is not a gift. It is an investment against the devastation that an uncontrolled climate can cause to all of us. It is indeed a down payment on a ‌safer⁢ world and a more prosperous future for every nation on Earth.”

UN ⁣Secretary general António Guterres ‌in Baku.IGOR KOVALENKO<span class="ue-c-article__

Guterres’ concern has a name: donald Trump.The ⁢newly elected US president has⁣ already exerted his influence on Argentina’s withdrawal from COP29, ordered by Javier Milei. Trump has⁤ announced his intention to abandon the Paris Agreement again, and a trickle-down effect among countries with far-right governments could scupper ⁣any funding deal if a decision is ⁢made to postpone COP30 in Brazil.

The new goal aims​ to ⁢tenfold the 100,000 million dollars committed annually in 2009at COP15 in ‌Copenhagen (which ended in failure in everything else). Though, reaching that⁤ figure took more than ⁢a decade and is considered wholly insufficient given the growing impact of climate change and the need to accelerate the energy transition in less favored countries.

To illustrate the inequality, a fact that emerged ⁢at COP29 is sufficient: in 2022, all of Africa‌ has added less solar capacity than belgium. ⁢At least ⁢30 ‍African countries closed the same year without adding large-scale solar capacity. The installed power on the⁣ entire ⁢African continent is a fifth of‍ that ⁣of troubled Germany. Programs such as ⁣the World bank’s Scaling Solar, successfully launched in Zambia and Senegal, have ‍been left in dry ⁣dock.

The New Collective Quantified Goal (NSQG) aims to break this barrier and promote renewable energy financing ‍in developing countries, as well as invest ​in adaptation measures and protection against the growing impact of extreme weather. The amount under consideration as ⁤the start of COP29 is at‌ least one trillion dollars per year, starting in 2030 or‌ 2035.

Developing countries⁢ require that most economic ⁣aid ⁢be in the form of grants and not loansso as not to aggravate the debt avalanche. Under consideration is how to⁢ involve the private sector and implement measures such as new taxes on​ fossil fuels (or even a global ⁤wealth tax).

“We were vrey clear and not we want to leave Baku without a number“said Adonia Ayebare, Ugandan delegate and spokesperson for Group 77⁣ plus China. “This text⁢ is not valid ‍for us ‌and we want a firm and clear commitment,” stressed ⁢Ali Mohamed, head of the Kenyan delegation in Samoa. A spokesperson for Samoa Even,⁤ through the mouths of the island countries, he regretted the presidency’s initial proposal: “The critical element of the⁢ puzzle is missing”.

The European Union, without going any further, did not want to ‍get carried away with a figure ⁤until the mechanisms and resources are clarified. However,the‍ European ​Commissioner ‍for Climate Action called the draft “clearly unacceptable”. This was also underlined by the British Minister for Energy and Climate Change, Ed Miliband, who took advantage‍ of⁤ the summit to launch ⁣the Global Clean ‌Energy Alliance. ​ The text ​is​ insufficient and⁤ must reflect the needs and interests of developing countries: “There are still differences and⁢ we cannot afford to ⁢fail.”

Brazil and ​Australia were perhaps the two most active countries at COP29 and they‌ also offered themselves as intermediaries to ‍build bridges between the north and the south of the world. “I heard demand from developing countries could ⁢be as high as 1.3 trillion,” acknowledged Australian Climate ⁢Change Minister Chris Bowen. “The biggest ‌difference,‌ however, is in the financing criteria, what part can be ⁢considered as grants and what ⁤part as loans and private investments.”

NGOs were also very critical of the presidency’s proposal. “We‍ have to ⁢put a number on ‍the table otherwise we risk coming​ out without a result“, said Tasneem Essop, head⁣ of Climate Action Network International. “Developing countries came to Baku ‍hoping for a meaningful financing deal,but ⁢we see that developed countries continue​ to play with the lives of people who⁢ “are on the front lines of the climate ⁤disaster.” , manipulating and subverting‍ critical negotiations.”

A subsidy of less than $1 trillion per⁢ year would be sufficient to address the impacts of climate change and ensure a just transition to a more secure future,” said Joseph Sikulo, Pacific Director at ‍350.org.

While the numbers of the needs of the Global South are clear, so is the inability of ​the Global North‌ to arrive ⁢at this summit with the tasks accomplished. In ⁢these last hours of COP29 we ask for climate repairs that allow for rapid, just and definitive repairs . decarbonization.

How can developed ​nations effectively support renewable energy initiatives in‌ under-resourced regions?

Interview ⁣between Time.news Editor and Climate Finance Expert

Editor: ​Welcome to Time.news! Today, we have a special guest: a leading ‌expert in climate finance, Dr. Laura Mendoza. Dr. Mendoza, thank you‌ for joining us ⁣to⁢ discuss‍ the‍ ongoing⁤ COP29 negotiations in Baku. ​The stakes seem ​extremely high, don’t they?

Dr. Mendoza: Thank ​you for having me. Yes,⁢ indeed, ⁢the stakes could⁢ not be higher. The ‍discussions⁣ at ⁣COP29 revolve around crucial financial commitments aimed at supporting⁢ the least developed countries in mitigating and ⁢adapting to climate change. As the UN Secretary-General ⁤António Guterres emphasized, failure is simply not an option.

editor: Absolutely.Guterres’ remarks about the need for increased funding resonated ‌with many delegates.He mentioned that the world needs to see these⁢ funds as investments rather then mere⁣ gifts.⁤ What’s your take on ‍this perspective?

Dr. ‌Mendoza: Guterres is correct; viewing climate funding as an investment‍ is critical. It’s an investment not just in the⁣ future of developing nations,but also in the ⁢global economy,considering that climate change distinctly poses risks to all nations. The ‌projected funding requirement of one trillion ​dollars per year for the developing ⁢world underscores the urgency. However, developed countries’ offers ​of only 200 to 300 billion fall substantially short.

Editor: There was considerable commotion when the Azerbaijan presidency left the funding​ amount as ⁢an “X” ⁢in the​ draft final text. What kind ‍of ​impact ​does ​ambiguity like⁣ this have on negotiations?

Dr. Mendoza: The ambiguity is indeed concerning. It can undermine trust among nations, especially ⁢those most vulnerable⁤ to⁢ climate impacts. When countries ⁤come to these negotiations with expectations, only to encounter vague proposals, it can⁤ breed frustration and​ skepticism.Clara messages are vital to facilitate consensus ​and ‌motivate meaningful commitments.

Editor: we’ve also seen familiar themes from ‍past COP conferences resurfacing,‌ like the criticisms directed at leaders such as ‌Sultan Al Jaber during COP28. Do you think political figures’ backgrounds affect ⁣their ability to⁢ engage meaningfully in climate discussions?

Dr. Mendoza: Absolutely. Leadership styles and‌ backgrounds can greatly influence ⁣discussions. For instance, having a leader who also runs an oil company at the helm of a climate summit ‍raises questions‍ about conflicting interests. ⁤Participants ⁣need to feel assured ⁣that their‍ leaders are wholly committed to genuine climate action, not just fulfilling⁢ corporate agendas.

Editor: Relating to politics, Guterres specifically expressed concerns regarding the new U.S. management under ​Donald Trump and⁤ its potential impact ⁢on ‌global climate agreements.Could this create a domino effect among other nations?

Dr. Mendoza: ‌ It‍ certainly ⁣could.Trump’s​ previous actions⁣ withdrew the U.S. from critical agreements like ​the ‌Paris Accord and encouraged a range of right-wing governments to ⁢adopt⁢ similar​ stances. If‌ countries begin​ to backtrack on climate ⁢commitments,it presents a significant​ risk ⁢to collective action and financing. The potential⁢ for countries like Argentina to withdraw from ‌COP negotiations is alarming.

Editor: And the ​statistics about solar energy capacity in Africa⁢ illustrate stark inequalities ​in‍ climate readiness. ⁢With the African continent barely ⁤adding⁢ more​ solar⁢ capacity than Belgium, how can developed nations assist​ in bridging that gap?

Dr.​ Mendoza: the figures are shocking​ and highlight the need for urgent and targeted investment in⁢ African nations’ renewable ​energy projects. Programs like the world Bank’s ⁤Scaling ⁣Solar initiative are essential starting points; however, they must be scaled significantly. Developed nations shoudl provide not only financial ⁣support but also technology transfer and capacity building to empower these countries in transitioning ⁢to clean energy.

Editor: Looking ahead, what would‍ you say is the most critical takeaway from the ‍COP29 discussions thus far?

Dr. mendoza: The most critical takeaway is that the world cannot afford to⁣ treat climate⁢ change as​ a distant issue. The financial commitments being negotiated are not merely numbers; they represent lives,ecosystems,and futures. immediate⁤ action, clear dialog, and concrete pledges are vital to ‍secure a​ sustainable future for all nations.

Editor: Thank you,Dr. Mendoza, for your valuable insights. As the COP29 negotiations continue, it’s clear that ​collaboration and commitment are essential in addressing climate ⁣change and supporting⁢ vulnerable nations. ⁤Let’s hope for‍ a productive outcome.

Dr. Mendoza: Thank you ⁤for having me. ⁣I⁤ share that hope, and it begins with every nation recognizing ⁤the ‍interconnectedness⁣ of our⁣ futures.

You may also like

Leave a Comment