The COP29 climate negotiations in Baku, Azerbaijan, have taken center stage recently as nations grapple with the pressing challenges of climate change. Tensions rose as negotiators from small island nations and the least-developed countries (LDCs) walked out of discussions, rejecting the current terms they felt sidelined their concerns. This dramatic exit has put the negotiations at serious risk of collapse, highlighting long-standing frustrations from vulnerable states struggling for equitable representation at the table.
During the marathon talks, which extended well beyond their scheduled end, Cedric Schuster, the Samoan chairman of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and LDC representatives, voiced deep disappointment. "We came here to this COP for a fair deal. We feel we haven’t been heard, and there’s a deal to be made,” Schuster stated, emphasizing the feeling of exclusion many delegates from affected nations have experienced throughout the talks. The group’s walkout signals not just dissatisfaction but the urgent need for meaningful consultations to address climate financing and adaptation strategies for those most at risk.
On the negotiation front, discussions continued with several countries calling on industrialized nations to improve financial commitments for climate action. Delegates from developing nations articulated demands for $1.3 trillion (€1.25 trillion) to support immediate adaptations to climate impacts, primarily due to extreme weather events and rising sea levels. The recent commitment of $300 billion annually by 2035, rising from the previous $250 billion offering, still falls short of what these countries deem necessary.
DW's correspondent Giulia Saudelli reported from Baku, stating, "There's a feeling time is starting to run out, which could play against the most vulnerable countries.” This urgency amplifies the stakes, as countries with lesser resources face deteriorated climate conditions impacting their economies and environments.
At the heart of this contentious back-and-forth were accusations aimed at wealthy oil-producing states, particularly Saudi Arabia. Instruments like the Mitigation Work Programme (MWP) aimed at facilitating the transition from fossil fuels have faced derailment from Saudi Arabia, as officials expressed their categorical disagreement with any climate deal targeting fossil fuel production. News broke of Saudi Arabia editing official negotiation texts, altering language seen as unfavorable to their interests, such as provisions encouraging just transition policies aligned with the Paris Agreement's goals.
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock condemned the actions of wealthy fossil fuel states, asserting they've "ripped off those states most at risk from climate change." She made it clear, "We Europeans will not allow the most vulnerable states to be ripped off by some of the new fossil-fuel emitters.” Baerbock stressed the interconnectedness of climate financing and reducing harmful emissions, stating bluntly, "Money alone won't save the world," urging collective action to pursue the path toward limiting global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, as outlined by the Paris Agreement.
This is not the first COP negotiation to see accusations of obstructionism. Saudi Arabia has been flagged previously for posing barriers to commitments aimed at fossil fuel reductions. Critics characterize the kingdom as operating like a “wrecking ball,” undermining efforts to renew pledges to transition away from fossil fuel reliance. Reports emerged of specific instances where they blocked drafts focusing on the transition to renewable energy.
Despite the tumult, official representatives from AOSIS reaffirmed their commitment to the negotiation process, stating, "If this cannot be the case, it becomes very difficult for us to continue our involvement here at COP29." The need for collective cooperation and inclusive dialogues was evident as the talks progressed with high stakes involved.
To summarize, the dramatic developments at COP29 reveal both the geopolitical tug-of-war between fossil fuel-producing nations and climate-vulnerable states amid the pressing urgency of climate action. The walkout from vulnerable nations underlines their demands for representation and the necessity of crafting agreements reflecting their needs and realities. It remains to be seen if the negotiations can pivot from this precarious edge and yield effective agreements before the discussions close.
