With the just published draft agreement for the COP28 meeting in Dubai on climate change fails to ask countries to eliminate coal, oil, and other fossil fuels on a gradual basis despite this. The critics say that some of the wording in the document has been manipulated by the so-called oil rich countries with an intention of deemphasizing the need to eliminate fossil fuels.
However, the shadow of obstruction by the oil-based economies like host country UAE remains. A previous version provided for complete phasing out of greenhouse gas but has been replaced by “the need for action”. This blatant show of nonchalance on emitters part is just absurd because such blatantly self-serving softened language amid the escalating climate crisis is just so risible. The preservation earth’s climatic stability remains the ultimate undertaking for mankind the actual beacon guiding global cooperation. However, current national policies overemphasize such economic, as opposed to moral targets and threaten the possibility of the earth’s inhabitation in future centuries.
In order to provide real blueprint for safe and sustainable future the negotiations should focus to drastic fair moves keeping up with severity and extent of crisis. Adaption funding has got to multiply, not make crumbs in its struggle of billions of dollars spent on fossils fuels. However, the emphasis should be on speeding up the phase-outs, not the phasedowns. Billions, not promises for and loss and damage funds.
A draft accord published on 11th December 2023 was lambasted for not issuing an unequivocal statement banning fossil fuel phasing-out. However, more than 100 member states at the conference have signified support towards slowly phasing out fossil fuels, except oil producing nations like Saudi Arabia and Iran who are vehemently opposed to such a measure. The critics hold that such oil-endowed states are able to affect the wording of the text and weaken the importance of the fossil fuel problem itself.
It is believed that Saudi Arabia demanded UAE, the host of COP-28 meetings, delete any mention regarding fossil fuel in the agreement of COP-28 summit. The participation of oil-producing states gives rise to doubts about the quality and objectivity of the negotiating process. The involvement of COP28 president Sultan al-Jaber, head of a national oil company, has likewise elicited opposition and cast doubt on the event’s links to the oil sector.
The lack of a specific commitment on phasing out fossil fuels in the draft agreement will leave a huge impact on international efforts against climate change. The main emitters of greenhouse gases are fossil fuels, thus preventing the progress towards combating climate change. It has proven difficult for there to be serious commitment towards phasing out coal without significant economic fallouts in many countries. As such, without serious move to eliminate fossil fuels there is limited potential of meeting Paris agreement targets and ensuring global warming remains at 1.5 degree Celsius The diluted language of the draft agreement could diminish the authenticity of COP28 on addressing the climate crisis.
Some stakeholders have criticized the language of the draft concerning the fossil fuels. According to the US Department of State, the language ought to be “substantially strengthened” that speaks directly to a firm commitment on the part of developed countries to phase out fossil fuel use. According to German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbok, the present package does not give her government to endorse it. The weaker language in this document has alarmed climate proponents, who fear this conference will fail in fighting against climate change.
In conclusion, fossil fuel language in COP 28 reveals how difficult it is for countries to reach consensus during international climate change talks. With oil-rich countries being noticeably absent from a clear call to phase out fossil fuel usage in the draft, such concerns are justified. However, the failure to prioritize the transition away from fossil fuels could prevent global efforts to mitigate climate change. COP28 needs to take into consideration these points in its language on fossil fuels for the situation to prove an authentic and practical solution to climate change emergency.
By The European Institute for International Law and International Relations
References
Al Jazeera. (2023, December 11). COP28 draft deal slammed for dropping call to phase out fossil fuels. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/11/cop28-draft-deal-slammed-for-dropping-call-to-phase-out-fossil-fuels
Gambrell, J., Keaten, J., Borenstein, S., & Arasu, S. (2023, December 12). As COP28 nears finish, critics say proposal “doesn’t even come close” to what’s needed on climate. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/cop28-climate-summit-negotiations-fossil-fuels-47dfd6dbf32d987e885acd6dbffc7954
Guardian News and Media. (2023, December 11). Cop28 draft climate deal criticised as “grossly insufficient” and “incoherent.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/11/cop28-draft-agreement-calls-for-fossil-fuel-cuts-but-avoids-phase-out
Volcovici , V., Spring, J., & Abnett, K. (2023, December 12). COP28 heads for overtime as draft fossil fuel deal divides nations. https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/cop28-heads-overtime-draft-fossil-fuel-deal-divides-nations-2023-12-12/
