Caroline Mair-Toby and Donna Bagnall
20 December 2023
Caroline Mair-Toby and Donna Bagnall
20 December 2023
What an intense COP.
What do we think? We’re still trying to weigh between islands and Indigenous perspectives - two very different things.
Countries don’t always agree with their Indigenous populations. And Indigenous Peoples don’t always agree with the neo-colonial settler occupations that occupy what they still consider to be their lands. We forget that there are two entirely different world views that each hold, often because our privilege allows us to live entirely within that settler-occupier mainstream society. Some islands fall into this framework, and other islands are run and operated by their First Peoples or Indigenous populations. Some relations are volatile, while other are calm.
The perspective of the UNFCCC COP from the Institute’s first COP in Durban in 2011 to now in 2023 has been incredible. What seemed impossible back then - greater recognition of small islands, recognition of Indigenous Peoples, and even a reckoning for colonialism (an operationalized fund for loss and damage) - has been achieved today, and that’s no small feat of international diplomacy.
The Global Stocktake climate agreement just finalised at this year's UN Climate Conference of the Parties (COP28) is in one sense hugely momentous as, for the first time in its 28-year history, it puts "fossil fuels" in centre frame as the culprit for climate change, and calls for a "transitioning away from fossil fuels" and "accelerated action in this critical decade". It also seeks accelerated efforts towards the "phase-down of unabated coal power."
However, that is arguably where the celebrations start and end for Small Island States and Indigenous Peoples around the world. From our perspective, the deal seems filled with a litany of loopholes, and may yet prove to be a masterclass in gaslighting.
Potentially, through smoke and mirrors in the form of clever ambiguous drafting, the agreement could allow room for delay and be manipulated to promote fossil fuel expansion. It could also be used (abused) to slow down the necessary transfer of massive fossil fuel subsidies to the vital task of transitioning consumers and businesses onto clean energy technologies.
The COP President remarked that fossil fuel producers will continue to make investments in fossil fuel production in response to the level of fossil fuel demand. Equally, we say that the market's demand should no longer be artificially inflated and distorted by fossil fuel subsidies as this will defeat the new core goal to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels this decade. Justice, equity and human rights are the key factors dictating the transition speed, in line with the 1.5°C science.
Under the guise of emissions 'abatement' technologies such as unproven carbon capture and storage, together with the "energy sector" qualification, the Climate deal risks being used to endorse 'runaway fossil fuels'. That is the greatest fear of many small islands’ right now. It is the exact opposite of what the Paris Agreement requires. This is why several small island negotiators shed tears as we absorbed the gravity of the final agreement.
The agreement lacks the desperate urgency required at this time in history. This COP was the moment for governments to commit to the 'fossil fuel phase-out' that was backed by 130 countries, in line with the 1.5°C science pathways and the clear direction outlined by the International Energy Agency (IEA). Yet it was removed from the draft text by the UAE Presidency upon the objections of a powerful minority.
Of huge concern to us is that the President gavelled the final outcomes while all 39 countries in the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) were not yet back in the plenary room.
One major element that the final agreement does not reflect is the need for peaking of emissions by 2025 at the latest, in line with the science. This is an essential gateway to our non-negotiable 1.5°C upper limit, and all parties are put on notice of this. Our very existence depends upon it.
Overall, some of the terms appear to be an attempt to weaken or distract from the clarity and certainty of the Paris Agreement's goal to limit warming to 1.5°C, our North Star. We will not tolerate any suggestion that the language used has the effect of deviating us from that course.
The Small Island States will go forward taking a rights-based approach to our climate advocacy and diplomacy. We will uphold and enforce the rule of law and States' obligations to comply with their international law human rights obligations to protect the human rights to life and a clean and healthful environment, and to protect Indigenous Peoples' rights to self-determination, to culture, to heritage, and to their collective possession, reverence for and guardianship of their sovereign lands and waters.
However, we cannot pat ourselves on the back just as yet. What we heard in the corners of COP was very disturbing, very unsettling.
Through Caroline and Iya Akilah, Christianne and Dianey, Institute team members who were on the ground at COP, we spent as much time as we could in the Indigenous pavilion. We declined to speak on several panels and spent as much time as we could listening deeply to the stories, interviewing people, meeting with leaders of sovereign nations, Peoples, communities, heads of International Caucuses, Special Rapporteurs. It was not as much as we wanted, as we were still following the negotiations, but it was something.
And what we heard across the board was the same.
“There is no food left on the tundra. There is no meat left in the forest. There are no animals left in the forest. There are no fish left in the rivers. In the oceans. Only pollution. Only forced extractions and poisonous by-products. In Russia. In Peru. They are killing us. They are assassinating us. They are persecuting us. They are targeting us. I was on a hit list when I was 12 years old. Children are not terrorists. They removed the keffiyeh from my shoulders before I spoke at this event, like I was a terrorist. They cancelled the event before we could speak, because we all wore it in support.”
What is happening at the frontlines, and the suppression of those truths, was well in evidence at this COP. It was an ugly little toad of truth squatting at the sidelines of this very beautiful, very well done event. It was in the throats of every Indigenous person perched like beautiful exotic birds in traditional wear, singing out their truths to a blind, deaf, coterie of suited diplomat-bots and lawyer-bots for countries who did have a seat at the table. The irony. Some of these Indigenous representatives were leaders, chiefs, Kasikes, heads of sovereign nations whose lineage goes back millennia, longer than many of these settler-occupied nations that are allowed to call themselves states. But they still weren’t allowed a seat at the table.
So yes… different worldviews abutting each other, indeed. For us, it’s often like walking in between two realms.
So how was COP28? Depends on who, or which nation, or what concept of nation, you ask.
Next steps will be to watch closely for how the fossil fuel industry responds in the wake of COP28 – what are their actions and how will governments respond with their climate policy announcements?
We heard a lot of strong talk that fossil fuels have no future in our energy system. But their actions will tell us all we need to know about their credibility, their real intentions and their conscience towards their fellow human and non-human beings with whom they have the privilege of sharing this increasingly fragile Earth.
댓글