COP26 and the Thorny Contours of Climate Diplomacy

With the ignominious absence of India at the London Climate Action Week, which was held from 26th June to 4th July, 2021, the British hosts, themselves, were in for a bit of a surprise. India’s omission from the said event, was also a stark reminder of the fact that how difficult it is going to be to gather all the diplomats of the world together, in an effort to rescue global climate, which is virtually oscillating at the brink of disaster. Just one month remains, before the next round of high-stakes climate negotiations kick start in Glasgow, Scotland, in the form of the much anticipated COP26 Summit, to be held in November, 2021.

However, the aforementioned climate meeting, which took place in England, was not the sole instance of the underlying problems that plague the world of climate diplomacy at present. On 31st July, 2021, at an all-night meeting of the G-20 ministers in Naples, Italy, the said grouping had essentially failed to come out with an agreement concerning the phasing out of coal power, which bears the epithet of being the most polluting source of energy. This time again India, which happens to be the third largest emitter of coal worldwide, whilst depending heavily on this non-renewable resource, was a notable absentee. On being prodded as to what could possibly explain their absence at the said event, the Indian officials said that their presence was warranted at home, and that they also faced technical problems, as they were not able to login. However, they also made it clear that they had made their views prominent at Naples itself, at an earlier gathering of the said grouping. India, it must be pointed out, has set for itself a target to achieve 450 GW of renewable energy by 2030.

It is a preordained fact that getting India on board, would be the key to making the United Nations-backed COP26 climate talks a success, with Alok Sharma, who happens to be the President of COP26, alongside being a minister in Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s cabinet, having set an ambitious goal to ‘consign coal to history’ at the said summit. Such an endearing declaration, would help keep alive the hope of restricting the menace of global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as compared to pre-industrial levels. However, it must be noted that global temperatures have already increased to 1.2 degrees Celsius, the resultant impact of which is being felt in the occurrence of extreme weather events, as currently rampaging across Canada to China. In this gloomy context, the current pledges at play, puts the world on an ominous track to reach 2.4 degrees Celsius warming by 2100. The UN’s 2018 special report on global warming, portends of a grave forewarning, that even a temperature increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius itself, would have glaring consequences for the planet as a whole, which consists of a multi-meter rise in sea levels over a span of hundreds or thousands of years, as accompanied by the mass extinction of an amalgam of flora and fauna.

In this context, halting this irreversible trend of a planetary catastrophe, would require the cutting off of coal’s share of power generation to less than 2 percent by 2050, with the G-20, essentially failing to agree, as to how to accomplish this onerous task. It must be remembered in this regard, that an earlier meeting of the G-7 leaders, while failing to agree on the question of phasing out of domestic coal consumption, only managed to come out with a promise to stop its overseas financing alone. However, it must be kept in mind, that these aforementioned groupings consist of a relatively small group of states, and the diplomats at COP26, will bear the epithet of being the virtual representatives of nearly every state on the planet, which at the same time renders the prospect of reaching a consensus all the more daunting. Sharma, himself, has emphasized after the London meeting that unless all the nations get on board for an eventual coal phase out, the task of keeping global temperatures within the threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius, will be next to impossible.

It must be mentioned in this instance, that much of the groundwork, as accounting for the eventual success of the COP26 summit, must be finished even before the initiation of the talks itself because of two seminal deadlines namely-

Firstly, states are explicitly required to submit ambitious climate plans, which also goes by the name of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Secondly, the rich countries, have pledged to deliver a combined sum of $100 billion each year, so as to help poor countries adapt to this transition. However, even following the extension of the deadline on account of the Covid-19 pandemic, this key pledge concerning climate spending, has not yet materialized in practice, with some countries, also being unable to set definite climate plans as well. However, much of the problems, as currently plaguing the world of climate diplomacy, goes well beyond the tenure of the present day ruling dispensation at the centre. With 197 nations signing on to the 2015 Paris international climate agreement, deep fissures remain on the question of reaching its goals, as also the fixing of responsibility, as to who bears the brunt of responsibility for the current state of affairs.

Another key source of tension, which is persistently visible in the events leading up to COP26, is the question of climate financing, which was in full display at the international climate summit hosted by the US in April, 2021. It goes without saying that the world’s poorest countries have contributed minimally towards addressing the question of global climate change, but they also continue to be the most vulnerable to its effects, while being unable to afford the high cost of adaptation. It is based on the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibility’, that the world’s richest countries essentially agreed to pay a combined sum of $100 million a year, as a part of the quintessential Paris Agreement. However, they have persistently fallen short of the target. 

With the summit gradually getting closer, with each passing day, the ensuing debate has tend to focus upon a question concerning a handful of nations, situated in the middle of that scale as constitutive of the emerging economies. They are arguing that they essentially have the same right to industrialize with that of their peers, who have enjoyed similar perks over the past two decades. This glaring assertion of rights, in turn, relates to the question of burning fossil fuels. As is the case with India, China, which is the world’s largest emitter, is under immense strain to lay bare its plans, so as to achieve deep emission cuts spanning across the next decade. However, it must be pointed out, that neither of the nations has come up with an updated NDC as of now. The G-20 countries, on their part, despite accounting for a whopping 47 percent of global emissions, are yet to submit an updated NDC, with the list also encompassing Saudi Arabia and Australia as well. However, in Naples, this same conglomerate of nations, promised that they would commit to the same, before the initiation of COP26 itself. 

It must be taken note of, that even if countries like China, India, South Africa and Saudi Arabia all come up with more robust 2030 plans this year, such a collective assertion, would not be enough to bridge the gap between the current pace of emissions and their expected threshold. Thus, many climate analysts are of the opinion that the Glasgow deal would in itself require a novel guideline, which will demand of countries to revise or enhance their mandates on a continual basis, as opposed to the five year cycle, having been set out in the Paris Agreement. It is in this context, that China’s coal consumption is headed to reach a record this year, according to the International Energy Agency, with the urgent need being China to announce plans to limit coal use, either domestically or overseas. In a glimmer of hope though President Xi Jinping has declared at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) that China will no longer built coal-powered plants abroad, while reiterating its pledge that China will actively seek to peak its carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, while eventually achieving carbon neutrality by 2060.

At Glasgow, the US will also be the centre of attraction, for it to put up its share of financing for the developing nations. It must be noted, that as a result of former President Donald Trump’s decision to get the US out of the Paris accord, the country is currently lagging way behind its commitments, with the much talked about $3.5 trillion infrastructure bill, currently making its way through the Congress, only consisting of $600 billion in terms of new spending. Many commentators are worried at the prospect of this key piece of legislation, not being on the desk of President Joe Biden, before the initiation of COP26. In such an eventual scenario, the US will have to essentially renege on its promise.

Another point of consternation is concerning some developing countries like Bangladesh and Vietnam, who have stated their failure to come up with more ambitious goals, until the rich nations actually deliver upon their promised funding. As the $100 billion goal for 2020 went up for a toss, rich countries have come up with a plan, so as to deliver on the agreed financing in between 2022 to 2024 on an average. Sharma has also appointed ministers from Germany and Canada, so as to put together a delivery plan, in the face of such demands from vulnerable countries.

Lastly, it must be remembered, that many of the issues, which would come up for discussion at the November summit itself, have not been touched upon ever since the last COP in 2019. This essentially includes the completion of the Paris Rulebook on carbon trading, which falls under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. It must be remembered, that the 2019 talks failed to secure an agreement, with regards to this vexed issue, as the European Union and Brazil failed to agree on the question of accounting rules for the trading of emission permits. Thus, Sharma, alongside the other UK hosts, are quite painstakingly hoping to reach some sort of a compromise agreement that could guarantee at least some results, as emanating out of this year’s summit. However, many climate campaigners remain fearful of the fact that too many concessions can essentially turn out to be worse, when compared to no deal at all. Sharma has also hinted at the risk of reaching an Article 6 kind of a proposal, which would adversely impact the environmental integrity of the Paris Agreement in the ultimate extent. 

Debayan Ghatak 

Intern, Asia in Global Affairs

References

• With Time Ticking Down, Hope Is Waning for a Climate Deal. (2021, August 2). Bloomberg Green. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-02/hope-is-waning-for-a-global-climate-deal-this-is-why

• India’s no-show at London climate meet isn’t good news for UN’s COP26 talks. (2021, August 2). ThePrint. https://theprint.in/environment/indias-no-show-at-london-climate-meet-isnt-good-news-for-uns-cop26-talks/707776/