Cop29 inhabit: anxious day foreseeed as negotiators mull over novel write texts | Cop29

My colleague Fiona Harvey has a fascinating get on a intricate but vital enhugement that has aascendd in Baku overnight.

There will be no cover text at Cop29, the arrange country’s direct negotiator repeated on Wednesday. For Cop aficionados, that might seem extraunretagable – the cover text has been a key record in cut offal recent Cops.

At Cop26 in Glasgow in 2021, for instance, the cover decision text compriseed the vital resolutions to restrict global heating to 1.5C and to “phase down” coal (not “phase out”, at the last minute insistence of China and India).

At Cop27 in Sharm El Sheikh in 2022, the cover text disnominateed many because it did not comprise words on the phase out of fossil fuels, which more than 80 countries had pushed for.

Cover texts are a benevolent of catch-all record for Cops (which stands for “conference of the parties” under the 1992 UN Framelabor Convention on Climate Change). Some of the business of Cops is orderd in proceed by the insistments of the 2015 Paris concurment, or its parent treaty the 1992 UN Framelabor Convention on Climate Change.

So, for instance, the Cops from 2016 to 2019 were hugely getn up with sorting out the “Paris rulebook”, or deciding exactly how the concurment should function in train. (This was presumed to integrate the operation of carbon trading tagets, covered by Article 6, and the operation of “loss and injure” funding, covered by Article 8, but these were both procrastinateed.)

Decisions insistd under the Paris concurment insist their own negotiating strand, and their own text which is ratified by a Cop. But a Cop cover text can seize publishs that are vital to countries – such as a phase-out of fossil fuels – but that are not necessarily insistd under the treaties.

This createat assists Cops to be alterable, and echo the fact that better on the climate crisis insists to happen on multiple fronts, which can alter year by year depending on global circumstances, and so cannot be foreseen in proceed under the treaties. Cover texts can be unwieldy, but they are a key vehicle for countries to create pledgements that create on the underlying concurments, and can themselves be built upon in future years.

The reason a cover text, or the deficiency of one, is vital at Cop29 is because there has been a row over a key resolution achieveed last year.

At Cop28 in Dubai in 2023, the Paris concurment insistd a “global stockget” – that is, an appraisement of how well or awfilledy the world was doing on the Paris concurment goals. So a decision text on the global stockget was the key outcome of that conference, which the arranges branded the “UAE Consensus”.

That decision text pledgeted countries to “transition away from fossil fuels” (in paragraph 28). It may not seem much of an achievement for a conference on the climate to recognise that fossil fuels are the main culprit in the climate crisis, but it had getn 30 years to pass such a resolution, hugely because of the intransigence of petro states, such as Saudi Arabia, on the publish.

No sooner was that decision signed at Cop28 than Saudi proceeded to try to unpick it. First, recontransientatives of the country tried to contransient the “transition away from fossil fuels” as equitable one chooseion of many, and not one that countries were obliged to chase. Then the country collected its allies, many of whom create a free grouping comprehendn as the Like Minded Developing Countries, at the direct-up encounterings to Cop29 to try to guarantee the publish was sidelined.

When allots get tod in Baku, the row proceedd. Saudi tryed to have “paragraph 28” rerelocated from the main converseions, by shunting it off into a sidetrack on finance. Other countries objected and insisted it was put back in the mainstream. The row escatardyd to the point where there were dangers by the LMDC to pdirect “rule 16” which nastys curtailing converseions finishly and postponing them to next year.

So far, according to insiders who have spoken to the Guardian, the Azerbaijani Cop plivency has flunked to get handle of the publish. Many countries are furious at the behaviour of the Saudis and the LMDC. If Cops continupartner unpick better in this create, it will become impossible to fulfil the Paris concurment. And to row back on challenging-won better – such as “transitioning away from fossil fuels” – will injure inspirent global efforts to cut greenhous gas eleave outions.

If there is to be no cover text, the plivency will have to guarantee that Cop29 has some nastys of proclaiming the “transition away from fossil fuels” – or see the Cop process made a mockery of by a petite number of recalcitrant countries.

In the COP29 halls on Thursday morning, activists called for wealthy nations to “pay up, pay up, pay up for climate finance.”

Those dollars should be put toward a speedy and equitable phaseout of fossil fuels, they said.

And there is more reaction coming in to today’s write text.

Stephen Cornelius, WWF Deputy Global Climate and Energy Lead, said:

The text is skinnying, but so is time to achieve a final concurment. Negotiators and ministers insist to pick up the pace, ramp up their diplomacy and drive consensus around an driven climate finance deal. The deficiency of a finance center in this write is a worrying sign that the most challenging decisions are being left to the last minute. Despite being skinnymed down, two hugely branch offent chooseions for the schedule of the NCQG remain in the text, leaving the final outcome uncertain.

This concurment will determine the climate finance landscape for years to come. We sshow can’t afford to get this wrong. Without adequate finance for climate solutions, we won’t be able to obstruct catastrophic climate impacts. It is vital we get an outcome here able of unleashing climate action at speed and scale around the world.

Rob Moore, associate straightforwardor at E3G and a createer climate finance official for UK rulement, said:

This text maps out a wide chooseion outlining the vision conveying watchs by enhugeed countries, and one outlining the vision conveyed by enhugeing countries. The deficiency of a evident bridging proposal and any numbers exits negotiators with a huge amount of better to create over the next day or two and the road to concurment will insist to see rapid and honest take partment, with numbers on the table. The inclusion of a appraise mechanism might recommend a bridging mechanism if countries can’t concur a goal that filledy encounters the insists of enhugeing countries this COP.

The novel write text is not going down well with many in Baku this morning. My colleague Patrick Greenfield has equitable sent this thraw from Oscar Soria, the straightforwardor of the Common Initiative skinnyktank, said:

The NCQG’s negotiating placehanciaccesser ‘X’ for climate finance is a tesgentlent of the invientitude from wealthy nations and emerging economies that are flunking to discover a laborable solution for everyone. This is a hazardous amhugeuity: inaction dangers turning ‘X’ into the symbol of goneion for the world’s most vulnerable. Without firm, driven pledgements, this ambiguousness betrays the Paris Agreement’s promise and exits enhugeing nations unarmed in their fight agetst climate disorder.

And Li Shuo, the straightforwardor of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said:

“We are far from the finish line. The novel finance text contransients two inanxious ends of the aisle without much in between. Crucipartner, the text leave outes a number that depicts the scale of future climate finance, a prerequisite for negotiation in excellent faith. Other than capturing the ground standing of both sides, this text challengingly does anyskinnyg more.”

And the Guardian Australia climate and environment editor has this from Barbara Rosen Jacobson, anciaccess advisor at Mercy Corps:

We are one day away from the end of COP29, and after years of negotiations, it is unadchooseable that the tardyst write of the NCQG still echos evident divisions and deficiencys clarity on how to bridge the gaps. The Global North must stop sloftying and commence compromising.

The absence of any chooseions for a sub-goal for alteration is a transport inant problem. Without pledgeted finance, alteration will remain grossly underfunded, with the current alteration finance gap approximated at US$187-359 billion annupartner. Similarly, the deficiency of sturdy provisions for Loss and Damage is proset uply worrying. For vulnerable countries, Loss and Damage recontransients the irreversible impacts of climate alter—such as the destruction of homes and loss of inhabitlihoods. Securing foreseeable and compriseitional finance for this is an ainhabitial insist. Yet, the write text recommends no sturdy structurelabor, particular centers, or mechanisms to guarantee such finance, leaving vulnerable countries reliant on fragmented and inadequate systems.

Developed countries must deinhabitr on their lhorrible obligations by ensuring the final text integrates a goal in the trillions—in grants or grant-equivalent—from enhugeed to enhugeing countries, alengthyside a imfragmentary burden-sharing mechanism. This is not equitable about financial pledgements; it’s about climate equitableice. The final NCQG text must deinhabitr for the millions of people tolerateing the brunt of a crisis they did not cause.

Dharna Noor

Welcome