At the COP29 climate summit held in Baku, Azerbaijan, the stakes couldn't be higher as negotiators wrestle over financial commitments to aid developing nations grappling with the dire impacts of climate change. On Saturday, the European Union (EU), along with the United States and other wealthy nations, escalated their climate finance proposal from $250 billion to $300 billion annually by 2035, aiming to thaw relations with developing countries who viewed the initial offer as insultingly low.
The summit, originally scheduled to conclude on Friday, crept past its deadline as delegates from nearly two hundred nations sought consensus on the funding plan. Amidst soaring costs of climate-induced disasters, many developing countries declared the previous $250 billion proposal utterly inadequate, compelling negotiators to reach for something more ambitious—an endeavor fraught with tension and disappointment.
Ali Mohamed, chair of the African Group of Negotiators and Kenya's climate envoy, labeled the old offer "a big mockery" during discussions. He voiced the sentiments of many undeveloped nations, emphasizing what was at stake. "We need to get agreement. This is important to provide hope to the world, to show we are responding to the climate crisis," he pleaded.
Among the discussions, calls were made for at least $500 billion per year to tackle the climate crisis effectively, reflecting the urgency felt by those on the frontlines of climate change. Sierra Leone's Environment Minister, Jiwoh Abdulai, echoed this frustration, stating the $250 billion target wouldn't reflect any real increase when inflation was considered. He expressed despair at the stagnation of negotiations, saying, "We have spent three years negotiating these numbers. And with the end of the three years, we have nothing." Confident but wary, he insisted stronger language was needed to facilitate funding access.
The crux of the negotiations rests on not just how much money is offered, but also the arrangement of contributions—how much is granted and how much would be loans. While the developed nations are pushing for contributions from newly wealthy countries like China, which has been reticent to take on obligations under the old agreements, the delicate intricacies of these discussions have caused notable tension.
To keep the momentum, negotiators from the developed countries are trying to find common ground with their counterparts. The broader target of raising $1.3 trillion annually, inclusive of public and private funding, remains touted by economists as the target amount necessary to combat the effects of climate change effectively. Yet, achieving this lofty figure is anything but straightforward. Already, mistrust is palpable due to past failures to meet climate finance obligations.
Delegates were eager for concrete progress during sessions and had hoped the heightened financial offer would soften the blow of earlier setbacks. Yet, the atmosphere turned sour when representatives of the least-developed countries (LDCs) and small island nations temporarily walked out, citing exclusion from key discussions. They reiterated their position: they seek more significant commitments because they are bearing the brunt of climate-related disasters.
"We feel as though we are left with nothing from this COP," lamented Cedric Schuster, the Samoan environment minister. He represented island nations who feel marginalized by the talks. "This is how we treat countries with the moral high ground, who stand to lose the most and have already lost so much?" he stated, underscoring the guilty conscience of wealthier nations who have historically contributed most to global emissions.
Even as EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra recognized the precarious position of the negotiations, he remained cautiously optimistic, noting, "It is iffy whether we will succeed." The specter of failure loomed larger with Donald Trump's political ascension, raising fears of backpedaling on climate commitments from the world's largest economy. If COP29 succumbs to collapse, it would push pressing financing questions to 2025, casting the issue back to future negotiations.
For now, the weathered negotiators continue to comb through drafts, weighing their options and revisiting what concessions they can afford. Despite the stakes, the complexity surrounding climate finance fundamentally encapsulates the dramatic rift between the global north and south, underscoring the urgent need for solidarity and tripartite collaboration to confront the climate emergency.
