Developing nations condemn COP29 NCQG text, drama continues

The COP29 UN Climate Summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, witnessed heated confrontations as developing nations fiercely rejected the revised New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) decision text. The text, which they deemed "unacceptable" and a betrayal of the Paris Agreement, failed to deliver clear financial commitments, drawing sharp criticism from multiple delegations.

Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, the head of Panama's delegation, delivered a passionate critique. "Why should countries like Panama bear the burden of loans to cover $250 million in losses from recent torrential rains or $1 billion in lost revenue from the Panama Canal due to droughts? Why should any developing country finance adaptation measures with loans while others profit from our suffering? We are told the $1.3 trillion proposal from developing nations is ‘extreme.’ But what’s truly extreme is spending $2.5 trillion on wars or $7 trillion on fossil fuel subsidies while failing to commit even a fraction of that to save lives. 1.5°C isn’t a choice; it’s a lifeline. Stop the circus—it’s time to deliver,” Gómez stated.

Bolivian negotiator Diego Pacheco denounced the text, asserting, “Developed countries seem to be moving from zero to minus zero with the current NCQG proposal—it’s like a crab walking backward. This isn’t just disappointing; it’s an outright offense to the demands of the Global South.” He further demanded that the text clearly reflect the provision of $600 billion and the mobilization of $1.3 trillion. "Anything less is a betrayal of the planet and those suffering its impacts," he added.

Honduras emphasized the necessity for new and additional funding, criticizing the text for its failure to ensure accountability or prioritize adaptation. “The NCQG must deliver truly new and additional funds,” said a representative. “The text must include the Adaptation Fund as a central channel for delivery.”

Pakistan expressed frustration over restrictive conditions and barriers to accessing finance. “The current form of the text fails to ensure equitable access for developing countries,” a representative said.

Developed nations also expressed dissatisfaction, though from a different perspective. The European Union (EU) described the draft as "imbalanced, unworkable, and unacceptable," urging more ambitious mitigation efforts. An EU representative stated, “We need to do more, not less, of mitigation. Public finance should prioritize adaptation and the most vulnerable, such as Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs).”

Germany and Poland echoed these concerns, criticizing the lack of progress on mitigation commitments. “The text offers no signals for ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) or clear steps for energy transitions,” they noted, calling for a phase-out of unabated coal and greater investment in green technologies and deforestation reversal.

Samoa and other small island states lamented the draft’s inability to address existential threats posed by climate change. The United States reiterated its stance of seeking contributions from all capable parties, while the UK deemed the text incomplete.

Saudi Arabia, along with the broader Arab bloc and China, refused to accept any text targeting specific sectors, including fossil fuels. They asserted that they would not renegotiate the Paris Agreement under pressure from developed countries to expand the contributors' base.

As the drama at COP29 continues, the path to a consensus remains fraught with challenges, highlighting the deep divides between developed and developing nations in tackling climate change.