Who pays is one of the oldest questions on the climate equity agenda. It’s time to answer it properly.
By Tom Athanasiou, Foreign Policy In Focus
I have for decades been assuring both colleagues and comrades that the climate negotiations are not a sick joke, that “COP” is not short for “Conference of Polluters,” that the negotiations matter. The argument has become easier to make as more people have come to see the implacable necessity of an international way forward. As imperfect as the COP process is, a world without multilateral climate negotiations would be far worse.
Still, there comes a time, amidst the floods and the firestorms, when even the practiced realism of seasoned observers must break down. This time didn’t quite come at COP29, though it came close. As Martin Wolf put it in the Financial Times, “the assessment has to lie between failure and disaster—failure, because progress is still possible, or disaster, because a good agreement will now be too late.”

The climate problem demands an earnest and cooperative international response, but Baku instead saw the Global North present the Global South with a “grim ultimatum”—agree to an inadequate offer of support or risk the collapse of the only international process where it has significant voice and influence. By its end, the Global South had been forced to accede. With the clap of the president’s gavel, and despite a broad push to assert that “no deal is better than a bad deal,” it got a very bad deal indeed.
There was also action on the emissions trading front, where the rules were finally nailed down. But the rules are pretty bad and the deal is more likely to generate a flood of illusory offsets than a flood of quality investment. Also, and importantly, neither carbon trading in particular nor private finance in general can honestly be expected to entirely finance a successful climate transition.
On the public finance side, the pressure to relitigate the Baku deal, already high, can only increase. The last-minute adoption of the “Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3 trillion”—a critical commitment to find a real path forward—is likely to define the COP30 agenda. The problem is that, barring an unanticipated political shift of the first order, the Belém COP, too, will fail to rise to the occasion.
The next year is going to be a big one.
Recent Posts
IDF Report On Gaza Medics’ Killing Called A Cover-up As Rights Groups Demand Independent Probe
April 22, 2025
Take Action Now Despite video evidence and global outrage, Israeli military report denies executions and offers limited disciplinary action for…
Democrats’ Working Class De-alignment May Destroy The Party
April 22, 2025
Take Action Now Democrats’ right turn 30 years ago broke the party’s historic working-class base. As workers left the party, party leaders then…
Trump’s Aggressive Deregulation Will Set Us Back Decades
April 22, 2025
Take Action Now A top financial regulatory agency has been commanded to ease up on fintech and crypto industries.By Veronica Riccobene, The Lever…
DOGE Cuts Pull AmeriCorps Volunteers Off Of Disaster Relief Jobs
April 21, 2025
Take Action Now Workers for the National Civilian Community Corps were sent home due to “new operational parameters.” The program’s long-term fate is…