The COP27 damages and losses deal is not a win. It’s brought us to desolation

Yves is here. Hate to be the voice of sobriety, but it is clear that there is nothing that even remotely resembles the necessary collective will to fight climate change. If you can’t move to a very low carbon footprint, which usually requires money (land, investment in some key infrastructure) and a strong back, you must participate in the current habitat destroying economic system to provide food for your family, as George Bush once said it. So it’s no surprise that COP27, in fact, whistled past the cemetery.

Amelia Womack, Deputy Leader of the Green Party of England and Wales from 2014 to 2022. Originally posted on openDemocracy

When the final COP27 agreement was released, the strong words of Pacific climate warrior Joseph Sikulu echoed in my head.

“Today, we wear black not only as a representation that we are fighting for the phase-out of fossil fuels in the text, but also because where we come from, we only wear black in mourning,” Sikulu said at a press conference. previously. this week

Referring to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed 30 years ago, Sikulu continued: “So today we mourn a process that is failing us, a process that continues to stall and fail our people, a process that is still cumbersome and does not take into account our realities We are here to mourn the UNFCCC in this COP process because it fails all that we are.”

Reading the COP27 final agreement, we should all be in mourning. COP27 may have committed loss and damage fund to compensate the countries most affected by the climate emergency, which they did not create, but which also went on a path of devastation. This path will mean the loss of lives, livelihoods, cultures and species. This is one that can wash away island nations and turn farmland into desert.

Financing loss and damage is a win, but without clear commitment to decarbonization and reducing emissions is a failure because there is no way to stop climate disasters that cause loss and damage. There are also many ambiguities regarding the fund, which does not describe the funding process and does not specify who will pay and who will be entitled to receive the money, not to mention the definition of “loss and damage”. It is clear that there is work to be done.

And since the world’s largest emitters are no longer able to pay into the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which was created under the UNFCCC to help poorer countries adapt and mitigate climate change, we will believe in a loss and damage fund when we see his. . In September, it emerged that only the UK had missed the deadline for granting $288 million in GCFand didn’t pay $20.6 million he pledged separately to adaptation fund.

We have received clear and consistent warnings from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Emissions should peak within three years if global warming does not exceed 1.5°C, which would destroy habitat and lead to further extreme weather events. This gives us only 25 months to cut emissions. COP27 is committed to this, with world leaders, including President Biden promises to save 1.5°C. But words are meaningless without purposeful actions, which obviously do not occur.

Annual COPs started in Berlin in 1995 and since then we have seen regular annual increase in carbon emissions (with the exception of a small drop during the pandemic), as well as in the increase in climate-related natural disasters. Last year in Glasgow 11 hour shift COP26 President Alok Sharma was reportedly on the verge of tears by the “phasing down” rather than “phasing out coal” document. This important nuance was not revised in Egypt, and Indian-led efforts to create further commitments to phase out all fossil fuels, not just the most polluting coal, negotiations dragged on but ultimately failed.

It was supposed to be a QC implementation, but it was just another blah blah blah. These negotiations are currently the only mechanism available to overcome the biggest crisis in human history. We need to radically rethink how we make change, hold countries accountable for not delivering on our promises, and make sure we are truly moving towards a zero-emissions future. In short, COP needs to move from words to deeds.

Since Glasgow, the force of the climate emergency has been felt around the world, whether it’s the floods that devastate a third of Pakistan, the ongoing drought in the Horn of Africa, or the UK’s first recorded 40°C temperature It’s clear we’re living in a state of emergency, but how much of the world needs to be under water until decisive action is taken?

In fact, COP seems to have been taken over by fossil fuel lobbyists. A spokesman for the negotiators I met stated that Saudi Arabia seems to enjoy being the “bad guy” in these negotiations because it benefits its fossil fuel investors. It was a chilling reminder of how a country with a sizable oil sector can jeopardize progress.

The mediator I spoke to was returning home. As the talks went into overtime, she highlighted the reality of the gap between rich and poor countries. The poorer are excluded from the summit’s conclusions if it is exceeded because it is not easy or cheap to reschedule flights home, she said. This COP was extended by 40 hours, which reduced the diversity of negotiators from around the world, as well as the attending delegates and press attention.

COP27 may not have had much action in the meeting rooms, but for a full two weeks the venue was filled with climate action. It came from delegates who came from all over the world to Sharm El Sheikh to try to make their voices heard. From a woman in Senegal asking for renewable electricity to an Amazon chief telling the world about the rising temperatures his community is facing, action has been everywhere.

Mantra Pacific Climate Warriors “We don’t sink, we fight.” It is a message of opportunity in the face of potential tragedy. As we begin to approach COP28 in Dubai, it is important to keep these words in mind and work together to fight for faster action on the climate emergency.