At the 29th United Nations Global Climate Summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, tensions ran high as developed and developing nations clashed over climate finance. Dubbed the “Finance CoP,” this summit was supposed to be a turning point for global climate action. Instead, it left many countries feeling frustrated and betrayed.
The Finance Debate: $300 Billion vs. $1.3 Trillion
The big headline from the summit was the announcement of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG). This new deal promises $300 billion annually to developing nations by 2035 to help them tackle climate change. On the surface, it seems like a win. But scratch the surface, and the cracks are evident.
Experts and activists had demanded $1.3 trillion per year to address the catastrophic impacts of climate change, especially in vulnerable regions. The agreed amount, however, is less than a quarter of that. Many see this as a weak attempt by richer nations to sidestep their responsibilities while presenting a feel-good illusion of progress.
India’s Fight for Justice
India, representing the voice of the Global South, was one of the most vocal critics of the deal. Chandni Raina, a lead negotiator from India’s delegation, described the agreement as “stage-managed” and “extremely disappointing.” She revealed that India wasn’t even allowed to speak before the deal was finalized—a move that raised serious questions about fairness in the negotiation process.
Raina’s fiery statement in the plenary room drew cheers from representatives of other developing nations like Nigeria, Bolivia, and Malawi. Together, they expressed deep frustration over how the deal failed to address the urgent needs of countries already grappling with rising temperatures, extreme weather, and economic instability.
Why Is the Deal Controversial?
The $300 billion annual pledge sounds generous, but here’s why it falls short:
- Too Little: The amount is far less than the $1.3 trillion needed.
- Too Late: Funds won’t start flowing until 2035, which is far off for countries needing immediate help.
- Lack of Focus: The deal doesn’t clearly allocate funds for critical areas like climate adaptation, loss and damage, or mitigation efforts.
- Grants vs. Loans: Developing nations pushed for grants (money that doesn’t need to be paid back), but the deal leans heavily on loans and other forms of finance that add to their debt.
Aparna Roy, a climate expert from India, called this an “optical illusion” of a solution, accusing wealthier nations of avoiding their historical responsibility for climate damage.
The Legacy of Broken Promises
This isn’t the first time richer nations have failed to deliver. Back in 2009, at the Copenhagen summit, they promised $100 billion annually to developing countries by 2020. That goal was barely met, leaving many skeptical about the new promise.
Former Indian ambassador Manjeev Singh Puri summed it up, saying, “The process and outcome have left a lot to be desired. But the good part is that the Global South remained united.”
India: A Leader for the Global South
Despite the disappointing outcome, the summit showcased India’s growing role as a champion for developing nations. By pushing initiatives like Mission LiFE (focusing on sustainable lifestyles) and leading renewable energy transitions through the International Solar Alliance, India has positioned itself as a key voice in climate diplomacy.
But the road ahead isn’t easy. India faces pressure to phase out fossil fuels quickly, even as it emphasizes the importance of energy security for its 1.4 billion people. With ambitious goals like achieving 500 gigawatts of renewable energy by 2030, India is striving to balance growth with sustainability.
What’s Next for the Climate Fight?
The summit in Baku highlighted a harsh reality: global climate negotiations are deeply divided. Developing countries, already struggling with the impacts of climate change, are being asked to do more with less support. Meanwhile, wealthier nations continue to dodge significant commitments.
India’s climate experts suggest a multi-pronged approach for future negotiations:
- Strengthen Domestic Resilience: Invest in climate-resilient infrastructure and focus on sectors like water, agriculture, and energy.
- Build Alliances: Strengthen partnerships with other Global South nations to amplify their collective voice.
- Reform Financial Institutions: Push for changes in international financial systems to better address the needs of vulnerable countries.
A Bitter Pill to Swallow
As the summit closed, many walked away with a sense of loss. Activists, experts, and government officials agreed that the deal was inadequate and felt like a missed opportunity.
“Baku has given us a deal, but it has kept no one happy,” said Aarti Khosla, head of Delhi-based research consultancy Climate Trends. “The spirit of multilateralism might be alive, but the results are far from what the world needs.”
For now, the fight continues. The Global South, led by countries like India, must remain vigilant and united to ensure their voices are heard in future climate negotiations. The stakes couldn’t be higher: for many nations, climate change is not just an issue—it’s a matter of survival.
