COP29: climate protection on the back burner?
The 29th World Climate Conference began yesterday in the Azerbaijani capital of Baku. The focus is on the financing of global climate measures and the international community's overall commitment to climate protection. Commentators also take a look at oil and gas exporter Azerbaijan as host.
Concrete, balanced solutions, please
Eco calls for real decisions:
“The success of COP29 will depend on the ability of global leaders to translate the compromises needed at the highest level into concrete and inclusive solutions for climate action. COP29 must address the deep structural inequalities in climate financing, strengthen accountability measures in carbon markets and create operational frameworks that prioritise the resilience of the world's most vulnerable populations. Ultimately, the results of COP29 will either advance or undermine global efforts to achieve a sustainable, low-carbon future.”
No one wants to foot the bill
Naftemporiki sees the summit as doomed to fail:
“The main topic of discussion at all recent COP conferences was and is money. Who will foot the bill for the green transition? The nice ideas of the past have been 'burnt' in the last two years by the war in Ukraine, the resulting energy crisis and the subsequent global inflation spike. The huge public spending of previous crises is limiting the scope of national budgets, while growing populism is putting governments under pressure. What's more, the glaring absence of leaders in Baku shows that governments have other fish to fry right now.”
Same old, same old on subsidies
La Vanguardia also takes a dim view of the situation:
“It's a bad sign that the leaders of the most important countries will not be present in Baku. Neither the US, nor the EU, China, Russia or India are represented at their highest level. ... And it's clear that the rich countries are unlikely to provide the funds that the developing countries are demanding. ... They need this support to develop without coal and oil and to cope with the severe floods and droughts caused by climate change. ... The fundamental problem is that the millions in subsidies that are still being paid for fossil fuels are not being channelled into supporting sustainable energy and development aid. On the contrary, there is enormous political, economic and social pressure to do the opposite.”
No progress without the US
There can be no progress in global climate protection without Washington's support, political commentator Aistė Pikšrytė writes in Lrytas:
“As soon as Trump returns to the White House, US energy policy will focus on maximising oil and gas production. ... Trump's presidency will undoubtedly slow down the pace of climate action around the world, making the goals of the Paris Agreement even harder to achieve. ... Without US support for reform of the global financial architecture, debt-ridden developing countries will have a hard time raising the necessary funds to phase out fossil fuels, mitigate the impact of the climate crisis and adapt to its consequences.”
There are also positive signals
Most leading industrialised nations want to continue to work towards the climate targets, Helsingin Sanomat points out:
“Trump has the power to slow down the transition to a zero-carbon, climate-friendly economy. ... But the rest of the world can still make a greater contribution to limiting global warming to two degrees Celsius. ... The EU's climate measures have been relatively strong so far. In recent years, it has also been recognised that climate policy must be integrated into industrial and security policy. ... In the past few weeks both the EU and numerous G7 and G20 countries have reaffirmed that the climate targets remain valid.”
An embarassing choice of venue
Holding the COP in Azerbaijan is unconscionable, The Daily Telegraph fumes:
“The usual spectacle of world leaders networking in fancy event spaces while condemning their voters to punitive green policies isn't the only hypocrisy on display during this year's COP. The fact that it is being held in Baku in Azerbaijan - home of fossil fuels and an autocratic government - seems to have been skated over. It's an obvious point that COP is antidemocratic - no plebs will ever be invited to make speeches to UN officials - but holding it in Azerbaijan seems something of a joke to democracy.”
Not a credible host
Le Monde calls on the regime in Azerbaijan to change its ways:
“Repression has intensified in recent months with the arrest of 30 opposition members, journalists and trade unionists, according to NGOs. There is no longer a single active independent environmental protection organisation in Azerbaijan. ... The Azeris no longer have any effective mechanism for sounding the alarm bell when it comes to environmental problems, particularly regarding to the effects of pollution from the oil and gas industry. The fight against global warming cannot be won without the participation of civil society. This is the message that the leaders and diplomats gathered in Baku must convey to President Aliyev.”
Trump is the elephant in the room
In Baku, everything will revolve around a person who is not present, Libération explains:
“He will be the elephant in the room at COP29: Donald Trump, who pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement and plans to do so again after moving into the White House. ... From now on, we will have to reckon with a man who has the power to relaunch the oil and gas sector, who rejects all proposals for regulating greenhouse gases, who views climate change as a 'hoax' – in short, a climate sceptic who not only admits being one but is even proud of it. ... And how can we get along without the world's leading superpower when such a colossal amount of financial resources is needed to accelerate the ecological transformation all over the world?”
US can't turn the clock back
Donald Trump is casting his shadow over the upcoming climate conference, writes the Tages-Anzeiger:
“The US won't be a reliable partner on international climate policy over the next four years. But it never has been. Twenty-four years ago, then President George W. Bush withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, the first climate treaty that was binding under international law. Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement eight years ago. Both ignored the warnings of climate researchers. Trump is still doing this today. ... This time the international community of the Paris Agreement and the environmental movement seem to be reacting calmly to Trump. ... Ultimately, not even Trump will be able to turn the clock back, even if he wants to provide more support for the fossil fuel industry during his presidency.”
China's chance
Beijing could step into the breach if the US withdraws from climate policy, Die Presse speculates:
“Very few people believe that Washington could really unleash a wave of withdrawals from the Paris Agreement. Trump already failed to do this in 2017. It might even bring some momentum to the negotiations, says David Waskow from the World Resources Institute. China, the world's largest green supplier, could take the US's place in the spotlight and shoulder more responsibility. Beijing could benefit in two ways: in the West, it would gain a tonne of moral brownie points. And in global climate policy, China would find it easier to push through its own ideas.”