The conclusion of COP29 left developing nations dissatisfied with the climate finance package, which promises $300 billion (approximately £240 billion) annually by 2035. Despite being an improvement over the current $100 billion (£79.8 billion) yearly contribution, many deemed the sum insufficient to address the scale of the climate crisis.
A Divisive Agreement
Rich nations were taken aback by the criticism, seeing the settlement as significant. However, developing countries highlighted legitimate concerns, particularly regarding the mix of grants and loans, and the last-minute disclosure of terms by wealthier nations. India’s delegate, Chandni Raina, dismissed the deal as “paltry” and called it an “optical illusion” that fails to meet the challenge at hand.
Though compelled to accept the package, many developing nations were warned they might not secure a better deal, especially with Donald Trump, a known climate skeptic, poised to return to power in the U.S. However, critics argue that wealthier nations missed an opportunity to foster greater global cooperation and progress on emissions reduction, especially as 75% of emissions growth in the last decade occurred in developing countries.
Challenges for Azerbaijan as Host
For Azerbaijan, hosting COP29 proved a formidable task. President Ilham Aliyev’s controversial remarks about oil and gas as a “gift from God” and accusations of “Western fake news” added to the tensions. Critics noted that Azerbaijan, like previous hosts Egypt and the UAE, relies heavily on fossil fuel exports, raising questions about the selection of COP venues. Senior negotiators expressed frustration, with some describing it as the most poorly managed COP in a decade.
China’s Growing Role
As uncertainty looms over the U.S.’s future involvement in climate talks, attention turned to China. Despite being classified as a “developing” country under UN rules, China shared details of its climate finance contributions for the first time, signaling a willingness to play a more active role. By voluntarily including its contributions in the global fund, China positioned itself as a potential leader in future climate negotiations.
‘Trump-Proofing’ the Climate Agenda
Even in his absence, Donald Trump’s influence was palpable. Negotiators aimed to “Trump-proof” the agreement, extending financial commitments to 2035 to ensure the U.S. could reengage post-Trump. Efforts to bring China into the fold were seen as a strategic move to safeguard the multilateral climate regime from further disruption.
Campaigners Take a More Confrontational Stance
A notable shift at COP29 was the heightened activism from environmental NGOs. U.S. climate envoy John Podesta was chased from a meeting with chants of “shame,” highlighting rising frustration among campaigners. These groups played a critical role in supporting developing nations but also pushed for stronger resistance to compromise deals.
As divisions deepen, the future of climate diplomacy remains uncertain. Whether such confrontational dynamics will persist at future COPs remains to be seen.
