Kamran Ali Bajwa

The just-concluded COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, was marked by a serious deadlock in climate finance negotiations, a setback that has left many developing nations deeply disillusioned. While the developed world had committed to providing $100 billion annually to support climate action in developing countries back in 2009, the reality has been far from satisfactory. The target, which was initially set for 2020, was only met in 2022—two years later than promised. This delay in fulfilling commitments is just one piece of a broader pattern that has characterized the provision of climate finance, particularly for the most climate-vulnerable countries.

Countries like Pakistan, as well as small island nations, face some of the greatest challenges when it comes to climate change. These countries are not only experiencing the worst of climate impacts—such as devastating floods, droughts, and extreme heat—but are also struggling with overwhelming debt burdens. For instance, Pakistan, in 2022, was devastated by catastrophic floods that submerged one-third of the country, causing widespread destruction. The costs for rehabilitation and long-term climate adaptation in such countries run into billions of dollars, yet the financial mechanisms to address these needs remain inadequate.

The international community has long recognized the need for substantial climate finance to mitigate and adapt to climate change. According to the Third Report of the Independent High-Level Expert Group (IHLEG) on Climate Finance, climate finance needs to reach approximately $1 trillion annually by 2030 and about $1.3 trillion by 2035. This estimate includes both public and private finance, with cross-border private finance expected to cover half of these needs. The report also emphasizes the critical role of multilateral development banks (MDBs) in driving the needed investments, urging that financing from MDBs be tripled by 2030 to meet the growing demands.

However, despite these calls for increased finance, COP29 revealed a stark disconnect between the global climate finance requirements and the promises made by developed nations. The urgency of climate finance is underscored by the accelerating pace of global warming. Recent research, including a report by The Guardian, has highlighted that the world is on the brink of breaching the crucial 1.5°C warming threshold—an indicator that the climate crisis is unfolding faster than previously anticipated. The past decade has already been the hottest on record, with 2024 projected to be at least 1.5°C hotter than pre-industrial levels. This only intensifies the need for swift and significant climate investments.

Given this backdrop, expectations for COP29 were high, particularly for developed countries to step up and make meaningful commitments in line with the IHLEG’s recommendations. It was hoped that the conference would mark a moment of climate justice, with wealthier nations, many of which have historically been the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, acknowledging their responsibility and contributing their fair share to global climate finance. Nations like the United States, China, the European Union, and India, which are among the top contributors to global emissions, were seen as key players in making substantial contributions.

However, the reality at COP29 was far less encouraging. The negotiations saw significant foot-dragging from developed countries, who resisted making the kind of bold financial commitments necessary to tackle the scale of the climate crisis. Initially, developed countries proposed an annual climate finance target of just $250 billion by 2035—a figure that was widely regarded as inadequate given the magnitude of the challenge. After intense negotiations, this target was slightly raised to $300 billion, a number that still falls far short of the $1.3 trillion needed by 2035.

This compromise was bitterly criticized by many developing countries, which pointed out that the proposed amount was “abysmally poor” compared to the scale of what was required. Chandni Raina, a negotiator for India, described the deal as a “travesty of justice,” highlighting the disparity between the climate finance needs of the developing world and the commitments made by developed countries. The lack of a substantial increase in financial support from the global north has severely undermined trust in the multilateral climate process and has exposed the gap between rhetoric and action on climate justice.

One of the most glaring absences in the climate finance discussions at COP29 was the lack of vocal criticism from countries like Pakistan, which are among the most climate-vulnerable nations. Despite Pakistan’s recognition of the urgent need for climate finance, particularly in the wake of the devastating 2022 floods, there was a conspicuous lack of forceful advocacy at the conference regarding the gross inadequacy of the climate finance deal. This silence is perplexing, given that Pakistan has sought financial assistance under the IMF’s Resilience and Sustainability Facility to bolster its climate resilience. It raises questions about the country’s level of climate finance activism on the international stage.

Further compounding the situation is the weak domestic media coverage of the issue. Despite the significance of the climate finance discussions at COP29, particularly for vulnerable countries like Pakistan, the electronic media coverage has been largely subdued. This lack of attention from the media means that the public is less aware of the critical importance of climate finance and the failures at COP29, which is crucial for shaping national climate policies and holding governments accountable.

The deal reached at COP29, which includes an annual commitment of $300 billion by 2035, is far from sufficient to address the magnitude of the climate crisis. While the pledge represents an increase from the previous $100 billion target, it still falls drastically short of the $1.3 trillion required. The agreement relies heavily on private finance, which may not necessarily flow to the most vulnerable countries that need it most. In fact, many of the financial mechanisms proposed are likely to be slow and complex, with developing countries struggling to access the funds they need for immediate climate adaptation and disaster response.

The broader issue here is not only the lack of sufficient climate finance but also the failure to address the structural inequalities that perpetuate climate vulnerability. Developed countries, which have historically contributed the most to global emissions, have an ethical obligation to provide the necessary resources to help developing countries adapt to and mitigate climate change. However, the commitments made at COP29 reflect a reluctance to take responsibility for the damage caused by decades of carbon emissions. This reluctance undermines the spirit of international cooperation that is essential for effective climate action.

In conclusion, COP29 highlighted the growing divide between the climate finance commitments of developed nations and the urgent needs of the global south. While the deal struck in Baku provides some level of financial support, it falls far short of what is needed to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. For countries like Pakistan, which are already facing severe climate-induced disasters, the lack of sufficient finance is not just a missed opportunity—it is a betrayal of the principles of climate justice. As climate change continues to accelerate, the failure of developed nations to step up with the necessary financial support could have catastrophic consequences for the world’s most vulnerable populations. The time for real action is now, and it is essential that global leaders recognize the urgency of the situation and honor their commitments to financing climate resilience and adaptation.