Chethana Janith, Jadetimes Staff
C. Janith is a Jadetimes news reporter covering science and geopolitics.
A poster from the U.S. think tank Foreign Policy in Focus depicting the Global North as a garden and the Global South as jungles exemplifies the summit’s underlying inequality. Is it a coincidence?
Speakers at COP 29, including the UN secretary general, did not propose how to stop wealthy countries from emitting Carbon dioxide (CO2) and other Green House Gases (GHGs). Instead, they proposed how wealthy nations should loan developing ones $100 billion for the latter to stop using fossil fuels, and remain as jungles.
COP29 is a Loan Fair
Josep Borell’s trope referring to Europe as a garden and the rest of the world as a jungle may have been disowned by some in the west, but this line of thinking has been adopted in the highest levels of climate debate and policy including by COP (Conference of Parties of The UN Climate Change Conference, UNCCC), 29th summit. The summit has been dubbed Finance COP, as it leaves wealthy nations to continue using fossil fuels, and urges them to give expensive loans to developing ones in exchange for the latter shelving their developmental needs, to purportedly save the planet from climate change. Surprisingly, wealthy economies that use fossil fuels, and hence emit nearly all GHGs, making tens of trillions in the process, are not required to stop emitting.
Some speakers at the COP think that top emitters, euphemized as ‘wealthy nations’ should only contribute a paltry $100 billion (less than Kenya’s or Ethiopia’s annual GDP) to be loaned out to all poor countries in exchange for the latter stopping using fossil fuel; essentially ending development. Thus, there is apparent double standards, where developed countries are allowed to continue emitting GHGs, but poor ones must pledge to stop emitting even in the future to supposedly save the planet.
Reading from BBC report on the 11th, and France 24 on 12th November, 2024, rich countries will continue using fossil fuels, to power their economies and make trillions annually, despite the UNCCC claiming that this form of energy emits large volumes of CO2 and other GHGs, which causes global warming, climate change, and threaten the earth. Also, both BBC and France 24 added that 200 countries were represented at the 2024 COP summit. However, readers should note that only 12 countries produce over 1% of the global CO2 emissions, led by China, the US, and India at 30.9, 13.5, and 7.3% respectively. Therefore, it is safe to argue that countries contributing under 1% are spectators, and not participants in any serious discussion aimed at reducing CO2 and GHGs emissions.
As seen earlier, conveners of COP 29, including Antonio Guterres did not propose practical ways of cutting down CO2 or GHGs emissions, putting into question the notion that the named emissions cause global warming. For the summit to have been meaningful, it should have convened key emitters, China, the US, India, Europe, and Japan as parties that can meaningfully reduce CO2 and GHGs emissions. By inviting only consequential emitters, COP 29 organizers would have avoided forcing politicians from countries making negligible contributions to global CO2 emissions to fly in airliner-sized private jets to Azerbaijan while emitting large volumes to complain about climate change.
Assembling those emitting insignificant amounts suggests that conveners had other motives. One such motivation may have been guilt-tripping poor countries from developing to maintain the prevailing global inequality. Another motive that should be considered is lending credibility to whatever Draconian resolutions the rich, selfish minority will propose in the current or future COP summits.
Reinforcing the view that wealthy countries are not convinced that GHGs emissions cause climate change, the BBC reported that the US president-elect Donald Trump will exit UN climate negotiations and accelerate America’s fossil fuel use. This shows how forcing poor countries to top using carbon-intensive energy is deceitful and malicious. Therefore, $100 billion ‘finance’ to be contributed by wealthy countries that will continue using carbon-intensive energy could be bribes for influencing politicians from developing countries to sabotage their countries’ future. Inviting such leaders to COP 29 may provide closer contact for inducing them to trap their populations in debt.
Debt-Trap Diplomacy
The ‘financing’ term used in the climate summit means that developing countries will not be compensated for forgoing development in shunning fossil fuels. Instead, they will be given small, expensive loans, plus be expected to agree to harm their long-term interests, raising the possibility that their leaders will be bribed or coerced to accept such harmful positions. Noteworthy, African leaders including from Kenya, and Ghana have decried how global financial institutions issue discriminatory and expensive debt to Africans. Thus, the proposed ‘climate financing’ is likely to follow this disastrous path. Also, the meagre amount issued as loans will have strings attached requiring poor countries to restrict their own development, even while issuers may encourage receiving politicians to embezzlement, such that the citizenry will only be left with debt obligation. In past cases, the World Bank and IMF loaned money to African countries in exchange for Draconian requirements such as austerity measures and over taxation to curtail development.
Also, these bodies leave loopholes for corrupt politicians to steal loans issued, burdening citizens to repay debt that had no positive impact on their economies. According to Daily Nation, the World Bank and the IMF lacked mechanisms to ensure that loans given to Kenya were used prudently, such that over half the amounts dispensed were stolen. Similarly, developed countries will dispense ‘climate financing’ and encourage corrupt politicians to embezzle the same and invest in the west, leaving the citizenry burdened by debt obligations. Therefore, the recipient countries will remain underdeveloped, while the wealthy ones get wealthier and emit more GHGs.
COP 29 Open Display of Apartheid Attitude
The current proposals to ‘finance’ developing countries in order for them to avoid fossil fuels, while developed ones generate tens of trillions in annual GDP primarily from using fossil fuels, shows an apartheid attitude. Therefore, negotiations concerning how wealthy countries should increase climate financing or put any conditions on developing ones must be shunned. The developing countries must have energy options that the developed ones had during the latter’s industrialization. Therefore, there must not be two-tier global citizens with the first-class enjoying a fossil-fuel-run economy with advanced products and services, while the second, having to accept a few billions in expensive loans to avoid these fuels. By naming COP 29 as the finance COP and making it about buying poor countries out of development, it seems that UNCCC and its friends, the top emitters, are no longer afraid of openly showcasing their apartheid perspectives.
