Category Archives: Resources

Germany’s role on the Global Stage is fractured

Op-ed by Meena Raman and David Williams

First published in Africa News Analysis in English and German.

Just as the German government agrees to spending billions of Euros primarily for military spending and domestic infrastructure, it is blocking any meaningful discussions on the provision of climate finance at mid-year climate negotiations currently underway in Bonn. Instead of using its diplomatic influence to lobby for a progressive position within the EU (the negotiation bloc within which Germany is a key driving force), Germany has not shown any discernible willingness to improve the catastrophic outcome on climate finance from COP29 in Azerbaijan last year. It would appear that when money is needed for military spending and fossil fuel subsidies, then money can readily be found. However, when money is needed to fulfil obligations under international law, then money is few and far between.

This year’s negotiations in Bonn are essential to lay the foundations for a successful COP30 in Brazil later this year. A letter by the Brazilian COP presidency circulated a few weeks before the climate talks in Bonn emphasized the importance for officials to prevent “procrastination and postponement of decisions” in order to be best prepared heading in to the negotiations in Brazil. However, the talks in Bonn were fractious from the beginning, as the EU blocked a proposal by the G77 + China (a negotiating bloc representing 134 developing countries in the Global South, accounting for around 80% of the world’s population) to include climate finance from industrialized nations to developing countries on the negotiation agenda. This could have enabled a discussion on which countries specifically would provide climate finance, an aspect which was severely watered down at last year’s COP29 in Baku. While a compromise was eventually found in Bonn to add the proposal as a footnote, essentially kicking the can down the road, it caused a significant two-day delay for negotiations to begin.

The Paris Agreement (celebrating its 10-year anniversary) stipulates that industrialized countries must provide finance to developing countries for responding to climate change. In times when many countries are straddled by an ever-increasing debt burden, most do not have the financial resources to invest in transitioning away from fossil fuels. In addition, developing countries also need financial support for adapting and rebuilding after extreme weather events such as floods, heatwaves, or droughts, which are increasing in frequency and intensity with every degree of warming. Countries such as Germany are therefore committed under international law to provide finance to affected countries. This is not a matter of charity or even benevolence, as it is so often portrayed — it is a moral obligation, rooted in the reality that the countries which achieved economic growth through the heavy use of fossil fuels now bear a responsibility to support those who are suffering the consequences.

For decades, Germany’s robust economic growth and commitment to upholding international law through diplomacy have contributed to its positive reputation on the global stage. In recent years however, Germany has alienated countries from the Global South by flagrantly disregarding the core principles of international law by supporting war crimes and genocide committed against Palestinians, and preventing substantial progress on climate finance. Amid geopolitical turbulence, Germany must realign its diplomatic strategy to build strong, trust-based relationships with countries and communities in the Global South, guided by a spirit of solidarity.

About the authors: 

Currently Head of Programmes at the Third World Network (TWN), which is an independent non-profit international research and advocacy organisation involved in issues relating to sustainable development, environment and climate change, developing countries and North South affairs, Meena is also a practicing public interest lawyer and an expert on climate change negotiations, a former member on the Board of the Green Climate Fund. 

David Samuel Williams is a scholar on Global Transformation and Environmental Change and researcher who has worked with communities particularly affected by climate change in Durban, South Africa, and Mauritius. He is particularly interested in how climate change exacerbates inequality and works at the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung.  

Meena Raman and David Williams are both members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ)

Briefing: End Financing and Promotion of False Solutions

The world is experiencing an unprecedented climate crisis and the impacts of climate change are already being felt around the world, with devastating consequences for ecosystems, human health, and livelihoods. There are more frequent and severe weather events such as floods, droughts, and heatwaves. These events are causing widespread damage to infrastructure and economic activity, leading to food and water scarcity, displacement, and even loss of life. Nearly 3.5 billion people globally are climate vulnerable. Yet the world leaders have been more focused on pushing profit driven speculative technologies and technofixes.

Real, proven, community-centered, cost effective solutions to justly address the climate crisis are increasingly being swept aside in favor of industry-basked, risky, expensive, and harm-inducing false solutions. Climate justice begins with ending financing for and promotion of these false solutions.

This briefing provides simple talking points to help debunk and counter various false solutions.

Not Zero: How ‘Net Zero’ Targets Disguise Climate Inaction

‘Net zero’ has been all over the headlines and is even championed by many environmentalists. So you’d think it was a good thing, right? It should mean that the leopards are changing their spots – the polluters are starting to clean up their act.

Unfortunately, far from signifying climate ambition, the phrase “net zero” is being used by a majority of polluting governments and corporations to evade responsibility, shift burdens, disguise climate inaction, and in some cases even to scale up fossil fuel extraction, burning and emissions. The term is used to greenwash business-as-usual or even business-more-than-usual. At the core of these pledges are small and distant targets that require no action for decades, and promises of technologies that are unlikely ever to work at scale, and which are likely to cause huge harm if they come to pass.

A new technical briefing from climate justice groups – available in 4 languages – explores the story behind the headlines, examining some of the assumptions and claims that are taken at face value in most ‘net zero’ announcements. It examines the IPCC emissions reductions pathways that do not rely on unproven technologies such as Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and shows how the premise of offsetting upon which ‘net zero’ rests is unjust and unsustainable. Finally, the briefing offers a framework for a fair approach to global climate action and lists many examples of practical solutions that could be immediately implemented to really bring emissions down.

Download the joint technical briefing by ActionAid, Corporate Accountability, Friends of the Earth International, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, Third World Network, and What Next?

English

Español

Française

Português