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.”

TRANSCRIPT

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 what does it mean? What would the money be used for? Why does this, at this point, still possible to avert total catastrophe, if the developing world can adapt, can deal with climate change, and the most polluting countries in the world — the U.S. historically the greatest greenhouse gas emitter — phases out fossil fuels?

MOHAMED ADOW: So, what we need to be able to tackle climate change effectively is massive reductions in emissions and to also afford the vulnerable countries the opportunity to adapt to the inevitable impact of climate change and deal with loss and damage. Developing countries, out of an assessment that was done by the U.N., have said they require at least $1.3 trillion per year to be able to contribute to the global effort to tackle climate change. What the rich world are now offering is just 20% of that, which effectively is a reduction of the promise they made 15 years ago.

Now, if we’re truly serious about emissions reductions and if we’re serious about providing solidarity to the vulnerable countries to be able to adapt, we should provide them the support that they require. There was a very objective, independent needs determination report, and that report said developing countries require $1.3 trillion to be able to do that. We wouldn’t expect the developing countries to provide 20% of the ambition that is needed, so why can’t we provide them the money to help them do it? This is a great swindle, and we must call that out.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about how climate change affects your country, Kenya, your continent, Africa, Mohamed.

MOHAMED ADOW: So, the continent of Africa is home to 18% of the global population and contributes less than 4% of emissions on an annual basis. But if you were to account for emissions from 1850, when we started emitting, the continent of Africa has contributed less than 0.5% of the historic emission.

This is a continent that is also most vulnerable to climate change because of our geographic location, but also because of our low adaptive capacity. We are ravaged by extreme weather events. We are now paying for, you know, the harms that have been caused by the historic emissions by the rich world. And instead of providing us support, what the rich world is doing is actually telling us to pay for those harms, so that we can be able to pay out of our own national budgets without actually them paying for their liability.

So, you’re vulnerable. You’re least responsible. But you also have incredible potential to contribute to the global effort to tackle climate change. Sixty percent of the renewable energy resources, especially solar, is in Africa. Forty percent of the critical minerals that are needed to help the world decarbonize are in Africa.

But you know what? Africa attracts 2% of the total global renewable energy investment. So, the continent with 600 million people without electricity, a billion people without clean cooking, instead of the rich world providing them the support so that we can be able to develop in a climate-compatible manner, they are hoarding that and not sharing the resources, both by way of finance but also technology.

Let’s remember, we’re in a climate negotiation. And climate justice has to guide us on how we respond to the climate crisis. Those with the broadest shoulders, who have emitted the bulk of the emissions and, in the process, accumulated a lot of wealth, in part by polluting without facing the costs of doing so, should shoulder the greatest burden.

AMY GOODMAN: Mohamed, you’re following these very closely. What is the role of the United States?

MOHAMED ADOW: So, United States is the biggest historic polluter. A third of the historic emissions have come from the U.S. And this is the wealthiest country, that has the greatest financial and technological wherewithal. Instead of playing by the rulebook, the U.S. is tearing it apart. They’re not stepping up. They’re not committing to sufficient emissions reductions. They’re not providing finance. And using the excuse of Trump, the U.S., instead of helping the world arrive at a good deal, they’re forcing the poor countries to accept a bad deal because of the fear of a Trump administration.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, “because the fear of a Trump administration”? What is — well, John Podesta is the climate envoy. He followed John Kerry. What is the U.S. doing?

MOHAMED ADOW: So, because of the threat of the Trump administration to pull out of the Paris Agreement, they want to force developing countries to actually compromise. They’re holding developing countries hostage to accept a deal that is not good enough. And here we are as civil society saying, instead of accepting a bad deal, a no deal is actually better. It’s better to actually walk towards a deal that meets the requirements of the world. There is no point accepting a climate finance goal if it’s not going to adapt to help us get the job done.

AMY GOODMAN: So, Mohamed Adow is from Kenya, and he’s the director Power Shift Africa. We’re going to go to Brazil right now with Claudio Angelo. He’s a former journalist, head of international policy at Climate Observatory, civil society network in Brazil, member of Climate Action Network. Interestingly, next year, the COP30 will take place in Brazil right on the edge of the rainforest. And you were just recently there in Belém. If you can talk about the state of these negotiations? Because it’s not done yet. I mean, we’re sitting here on Friday, late afternoon, around 5:00. Some say it might go ’til Monday, go ’til tomorrow. So the draft agreements can change based on how much people learn has been compromised, Claudio.

CLAUDIO ANGELO: Yeah, this is likely drag way overtime, because the text, as it is, is totally unacceptable right now. In fact, the text looks as if it was made on purpose for trolling purposes, because it’s obvious that no developing country could ever accept what is at the table right now. So it’s likely that we will have a few more iterations of this text. And if we don’t or if the language doesn’t change, this COP could end in a deadlock.

AMY GOODMAN: What is the position of President Lula, of Brazil? I mean, we just interviewed the Colombian negotiator, Susana Muhamad. President Petro — interesting name for a climate summit — even though he’s something like the sixth-largest oil-producing nation in the world, is committing to phasing out fossil fuels. What about Lula?

CLAUDIO ANGELO: Lula is pushing for massive expansion of fossil fuels in Brazil. One thing, however, is the situation within Brazil, and the other thing is the positions Brazilian diplomats are taking here and there actually being constructive. Brazil is willing to debate the implementation of the phaseout of fossil fuels provided for in the Dubai decision last year. Brazil even put that in the NDC, that it would welcome a debate for a calendar for phasing out of fossil fuels, as long, of course, that rich countries go first. So, we might expect to see some of that happening in Belém. We might even hope we’ll have a calendar, or at least a process aiming towards a calendar, established at COP30. But as Brazilian diplomats have been saying here very clearly, before COP30, we have to sort out COP29. And COP29 right now is not going to a nice place.

AMY GOODMAN: Agriculture is an important sector in Brazil, with agribusiness making up something like half the country’s exports. The sector also accounts for a quarter of Brazil’s greenhouse gas emissions each year. How will this be addressed? And then talk about where we’re headed next, next year, COP30, what it means to be in the Amazon rainforest.

CLAUDIO ANGELO: Right. Well, if you look at Brazil’s emissions curve, the agribusiness activities, if you account for deforestation, it’s actually 75% of our emissions every year, because 46% of Brazilian emissions are just deforestation, most of it in the Amazon and in the Cerrado, the central Brazilian savanna. So, agriculture is tremendously important for Brazil.

I wouldn’t expect COP30 to be a COP about agriculture or about forests. It’s going to be a climate conference in the Amazon, not necessarily about the Amazon. Of course, Brazil has its own ideas about how to handle money for forest conservation and for reducing deforestation. It’s actually doing a good job on tackling deforestation right now in the Lula administration. But COP30 should really be about the elephant in the room, and that’s fossil fuels.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to continue to cover this on Monday, even when we’re not here, not clear if it will be over by the time of our broadcast then. But I wanted to ask you one more question, about Brazil’s federal police force recommending criminal charges against the far-right former President Jair Bolsonaro for attempting a coup as he tried to cling to power in the wake of the 2022 presidential election. The recommended charges against Bolsonaro, along with 36 former aides and Cabinet members, came as CNN Brazil reported Bolsonaro had “full knowledge” of a plot to assassinate then-President-elect Lula. Five people, including a former adviser to Bolsonaro, were arrested over the alleged conspiracy this week. This is what President Lula said about the plot for the first time.

PRESIDENT LUIZ INÁCIO LULA DA SILVA: [translated] I can assure you that I am a man who has much more to be thankful for because I am alive. The attempt to poison me and Vice President Alckmin did not work, and we are still here.

AMY GOODMAN: As we wrap up, Claudio, the significance of this, of the former president, the allegations that he was involved with the coup and had knowledge of the attempted assassination?

CLAUDIO ANGELO: Well, the indiction of Bolsonaro and some of his former aides is, of course, very serious. But I will spare my celebration for when he’s in jail.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there but continue, of course, to cover all of these issues. Claudio Angelo is head of international policy at Brazil’s Climate Observatory. He’s based in Brasília usually. Mohamed Adow is director of Power Shift Africa, based in Nairobi, Kenya. But we’re all here in Baku, Azerbaijan, for COP29, the U.N. climate summit that’s being held here.

When we come back, we speak to the leading Palestinian human rights attorney, Raji Sourani, about the International Criminal Court’s historic decision to issue arrest warrants for the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and the former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Back in 20 seconds.

(break)

AMY GOODMAN: “Tell Us Who” by Climate Action Network International. Those are protesters here, climate justice activists, leaders in the climate community, dancing. They’re not allowed to make a lot of noise at the climate summit.