COP29: Calling all nations to work together for our common good

Looking back at this year’s COP, Jamie Williams, Islamic Relief’s Senior Policy Advisor on Poverty Reduction sees only division, delay and broken promises.

COP29 has been an immense moral and political failure. We needed a COP of compassion, solidarity and justice, but that spirit has been completely missing.

Instead, it was riven with division and the outcome has justifiably been called outrageous.

Promises of urgent financial support for the world’s most vulnerable people have disappeared and been replaced by vague commitments for the next decade.

The recommendations of last year’s global assessment of progress in climate action have been ignored.

Plans for justice for workers and those affected as economies transition away from harmful industry have been delayed.

Last year’s pledge to phase out the use of fossil fuels has been sidelined. Instead, new agreements allow carbon markets to license business as usual for oil and gas.

A decline in global solidarity

The preamble to the UN convention on climate change declared that change in the Earth’s climate and its adverse effects is “a common concern of humankind.” Its “global nature calls for the widest possible cooperation by all countries and their participation in an effective and appropriate international response.”

We are in this together and must act as such or all will be lost.

For years, despite ups and downs, there was a sense that COP meetings were conducted with that atmosphere of global solidarity.

But in the past few years that has been in decline.

Things fall apart

At COP29 there was next to no evidence that rich and poor countries were working together in accordance with, as the convention says, “their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.”

With the lack of trust and no support from the COP Presidency to achieve mutual understanding, COP29 negotiations on finance deteriorated into name calling, and a conclusion that amounted to nothing.

Adapting is the future

There were several disputes over the Global Goal on Adaptation, including funding and how to measure progress. ‘Developing’ nations rejected financial reliance on the private sector, instead emphasising the responsibilities of ‘developed’ countries under the Paris Agreement.

Led by the Group of 77, these nations also pushed for tracking financial and technical support as key to achieving adaptation goals. However, developed nations such as the EU member states, the U.K., Japan and Canada rejected binding measures, favouring voluntary and flexible indicators.

Additionally, discussions about “transformational adaptation,” the need for new systems and ways of doing things, which scientists say is vital to addressing climate change, faced delays. Some, including the African Group, opposed moving forward without adequate time to prepare, pointing out that they are still awaiting fund for existing adaptation plans.

This divide extended to how the negotiations themselves were conducted. Developed nations preferred quick, streamlined processes led by facilitators, while the least developed countries group (LDCs) and the African Group insisted on collaborative, onscreen negotiations to ensure their priorities were included.

The negotiations were not wholly unproductive, though decisions on many issues were postponed to future meetings. This reflected the ongoing challenge of balancing the efficiency concerns of wealthier nations with the equity and binding commitments sought by developing countries.

But the lack of financial commitment means much of the work setting global targets for adaptation is rendered worthless when there is no means for their achievement.

Losing the centre

Traditionally non-governmental organisations (NGOs) attending COP have taken on a mediational role, building bridges between parties to facilitate understanding, compromise and consensus.

There is a feeling that we have somehow lost our way with that and have taken to name calling and derision in support of those we see as representing the world’s poorest and most vulnerable.

Certainly, inequality and injustice must be called out, but taking a side so unquestioningly risks collapsing the bridge.

And the result is COP29’s failure to serve those very same people NGOs want to advocate for.

Working to rebuild the spirit of cooperation

So where do we go from here? The answer may be in joining with those who seek to reinvigorate that original spirit of cooperation, collaboration and unity in the face of a common peril.

Islamic Relief will continue to work with the people most in need of support to adapt, while adding our voice to calls to create alliances for the common good, against greed and self-interest, wherever it may come from. You can read the latest account of our work with people in 23 countries here.

Please help Islamic Relief continue to build bridges and work together for our common good by donating now.

Photo credit: IISD/ENB/Mike Muzurakis