‘Betrayed’: India leads revolt at COP

The COP29 climate talks ended in unprecedented acrimony early on Sunday as India led a fierce pushback against what it called a “stage-managed” climate finance deal, moments after the Azerbaijan Presidency hastily gavelled through a contentious proposal amid celebrations, with UN and COP29 Presidency officials embracing. The hastily adopted text sets a climate finance goal of “at least $300 billion per year by 2035” and launches the “Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T.” However, India identified specific problems that could fundamentally alter climate finance obligations: “As we struggle to deal with climate change, the outcome proposed in the paper will further affect our ability to adapt to climate change, greatly impact our NDC ambition, and its implementation. will severely affect our growth,” Raina explained, emphasising that “the amount proposed to be mobilised is abysmally poor, it is a paltry sum and it will not enable climate action.” Pointing out that the sum is too small and will only be delivered 11 years later, she specifically highlighted three problematic paragraphs: Paragraph 8a: Allowing finance from “a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral” Paragraph 8c: Recognising climate finance mobilised through multilateral development banks Paragraph 9: Encouraging developing country contributions through South-South cooperation “That is almost 11 years later and that too from a wide variety of sources so it would be private, multilateral and there are large amounts of it left for developing countries to mobilise on their own. Public finance from a growing set of contributors, especially multilateral development banks, and new forms of finance, will help to unlock $1.3 trillion by 2035.” She added that “the litmus test on fossil fuel phase out will be whether national climate plans due by February show clear pathways to reduce coal, oil and gas consumption.” PROBLEMATIC PROCESS The deal’s problems extend beyond its content to the manner of its adoption. The text’s structure drew particular criticism for: One, setting a goal that’s “too little and too late,” coming only in 2035; Two, relying heavily on MDB financing, which India sees as a deflection of developed countries’ responsibilities; three, including problematic footnotes qualifying even the limited commitments; and four making way for developed countries to shift financing burden to developing nations through paragraphs 8a, 8c, and 9 The deal’s inadequacies could severely impact developing nations’ climate commitments.