Activists Slam COP29 Draft Climate Financing Plan as “a Great Swindle”
Broadcasting from Baku, Azerbaijan, on the final official day of this year’s finance-themed United Nations climate summit, we look at how climate justice activists are outraged at how little money is being offered by the most polluting nations to countries most severely affected by climate change. We speak with Mohamed Adow, founding director of Power Shift Africa, and Claudio Angelo, head of international policy at the Brazilian Observatório do Clima (Climate Observatory), who describe the latest text as “a great swindle” and “totally unacceptable.”
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: Yes, this is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org. We’re broadcasting from U.N. climate summit here in Baku, Azerbaijan, this year expected to be the hottest year on record. Negotiations at COP29, known as the finance COP, are also very heated.
The COP29 presidency has released new text for the finance part of the deal that calls for a finance target of $1.3 trillion by 2035, but only calls for wealthier and more polluting countries to pay $250 billion per year to poorer nations who bear the brunt of the crisis but are least responsible for it. Oil Change International calls the text an “absolute embarrassment,” saying it’s the equivalent of handing the keys to the fire truck to the arsonist. Talks to reach a final agreement appear likely to extend past today, the final official day of the summit.
We’re joined now by two guests. Mohamed Adow, founding director of Power Shift Africa, which he formed in 2018 to mobilize climate action in Africa and shift climate and energy policies to zero carbon, he’s based in Nairobi, Kenya. And we’re joined from Brazil by Claudio Angelo. He’s head of international policy at the Climate Observatory, civil society network in Brazil, which is a member of Climate Action Network Latin America. He’s usually based in Brasília but joins us now here in Baku.
We welcome you both to Democracy Now! I mean, between you, you have almost 30 years of going to these COPs. Me and you, Mohamed, have been going since Copenhagen, and, Claudio, you went even before that to Bali. Let’s start with you, Mohamed. You have called this the worst COP ever. And for people to understand, ”COP” stands for “conference of parties.” And you can explain why you think this is such a catastrophe here.
MOHAMED ADOW: This is the worst COP in recent memory. COPs are usually very delicate and requires a lot of diplomacy to get countries to agree to tackle climate change, reduce emissions. But the agenda for this year’s COP is to mobilize climate finance so that we can help developing countries, who have contributed the least to the climate problem, to be able to contribute to the global effort to tackle climate change, both by way of emissions reductions but also to help them adapt to the inevitable impact of climate change and deal with the residual adverse impact of climate change.
The presidency, instead of allowing an eye-to-eye negotiations between the parties, has actually been covering for the rich world and not forcing them to put forward figures. So, the developing countries have called for $1.3 trillion per year to help them deal with climate change. Developing countries have been doing this from day one. And up to today, we haven’t had a number in a text. Before I come to the number, the rich world have actually done everything to avoid to put forward a number. On the other hand, developing countries have been calling them to engage them in good faith and in a negotiation that allows us to actually have a compromise and a successful deal. Now, instead of facilitating a negotiation between parties, the presidency has done everything to avoid that and has actually given an excellent cover to the rich world. Of course, the responsibility is on the rich world, and the rich world have shucked their responsibility to provide climate finance.
On the text that you’ve just referenced, the rich world are now required to provide $250 billion per year, but from 2035. Let’s understand what this means. This is a 30% reduction from the $100 billion that they promised the developing countries, once you account for inflation. So, what they promised the developing countries is $100 billion per year from 2020. So, they made that promise 15 years ago and failed to honor it. Now they’re making another promise 10 years down the line, in 2035. So, once you actually factor a very conservative 5% inflation, that is a 70% reduction to the $100 billion, and it’s just 20% of what developing countries have asked for. And so, it’s actually a slap in the face of developing countries and doesn’t get us to where we need to be.
AMY GOODMAN: And........
© Truthout
visit website