Details of the new pot of money should therefore be discussed in more detail at the next climate conference in Dubai in 2023. A means of not letting the stalled talks in Egypt completely break down in overtime.
The biggest sticking point is who should contribute to the financial melting pot of climate-related damage and who should benefit from it. Under current rules, the US, EU, Japan, Australia, Canada, Japan and other wealthy industrialized countries would provide funds. Not only economically weak and severely affected developing countries in the Global South could benefit from this, but also countries like China or Saudi Arabia.
According to observers, such an arrangement would not receive approval from the EU and the US. China wants to continue to be treated as a developing country in international climate protection, as stipulated in the 1992 Kyoto Protocol. Western countries, however, no longer want to classify China as a recipient of resources because of its economic power and of its role as the largest emitter of greenhouse gases.
According to information from EU delegation circles, this obviously means that even developing countries, who would greatly benefit from the EU proposal, do not agree to it out of consideration for China.
The new draft does not respond to a proposal from Britain and other industrialized countries that has been circulating since Friday night, which envisages an equalization fund as part of broader financial regulation.
Initially, it was questioned whether the new proposals would be sufficient to reach an agreement among the nearly 200 participating countries. Countries wanted to go into consultations again on Saturday afternoon.
Before that, the UN climate conference was already on the verge. What is on the table is not enough in view of the 1.5 degree target of the Paris climate protection agreement, European Commission Deputy Commissioner Frans Timmermans said on Saturday morning. “It’s better not to have a result than a bad one,” he continued.
The backdrop for this are unofficial proposals from the Egyptian Presidency which, according to information from the EU, would fall short of the results of the previous conference in Glasgow with regard to the reduction of greenhouse gases. “We’re concerned about some of the things we’ve seen and heard over the past 12 hours,” Timmermans said.
Egypt’s defiance of commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions was “unacceptable”. “We want to go forward, not backward,” she clarified. However, the Deputy Commissioner expressly did not threaten to leave early. “Let’s continue the dialogue,” he said.
“We need progress, not regression. Here in Sharm El-Sheikh it will be decided whether the 1.5 degree target still has a chance. The world cannot afford a bad deal. The EU still stands by its offer – now our development partners negotiations need to move,” said Environment Minister Leonore Gewessler (Greens).
The Egyptian side said that the “great majority” of the countries considered the proposals “balanced”. Conference chairman Sameh Shoukry said most parties had hinted that the text represented “a potential breakthrough” that could “lead to consensus”.
Criticism of the current project comes from the environmental protection organization WWF: “There is a lack of a way to smooth the phasing out of all fossil fuels – i.e. coal, oil and gas. We need progress compared to the climate conference in Glasgow – which we’re getting here Standstill,” said WWF climate spokesman Thomas Zehetner.
The conference was supposed to end on Friday, but the Egyptian Presidency extended it to Saturday because of the many unanswered questions. Whether this is enough is uncertain.