DC Edit | $300bn climate deal falls way short, but still a compromise

The saying that half a deal is better than no deal at all might capture the situation best, though a furious India took objection to the way in which the deal on a pledge was thrust upon the world before hearing out the Global South.

The payout of $300 billion a year by 2035 is about a quarter of the $1.3 trillion per year that the voice of the Global South had been harping on because of the gravity of the situation in which climate change is affecting the lives of the people.

Climate change, as evidenced in droughts caused by heat as well as extreme climatic events like excessive rainfall, severe and frequent storms causing surges, forest fires, cold snaps and rising sea levels affecting different parts of the world at a frequency never seen in recorded history, is taking an increasing toll with the burden disproportionately on the developing nations that have contributed the least to it.

The talks ran 33 hours beyond the scheduled conference duration and were within centimetres of a collapse even after two weeks of stormy negotiations in Baku, Azerbaijan — a venue whose suitability was questioned too considering its allegiance to fossil fuels.

The Alliance of Small Island States, living in the greatest fear of seeing some of their member nations sinking to their extinction by higher sea levels, had walked out of the conference though representatives of the richer nations that are historically the worst polluters handing out assurances that the most vulnerable will not be ripped off by the few rich fossil fuel emitters.

Given the gravity of the situation and the harder geopolitical atmosphere in which the world finds itself in, especially in the wake of the results of the US elections being out and the incoming regime could well pull out of any agreement on the funding, any deal could be considered as incremental progress in the face of man-made pollution.

The deal at least shows an acceptance of the facts of the case and the need for concerted effort against climate change. If a safer, more equitable future is to be worked out, the historically rich polluters must pay the poorer nations to make the switch from fossil fuel to renewable energy sources, help farmers, allow people to move to safer areas from the places most vulnerable, aid people hit by climate emergencies, all of which can be done only if relief funding is at hand.

The $300 bn a year is only a down payment, and the amount may have to be scaled up after the world having at least agreed on the need to fight to reduce carbon emissions and keep the planet from heating beyond limits like the 1.5º Celsius above pre-industrial times, as has been postulated but the world is already at the 1.3º Celsius mark on that scale now.

India may be responsible for 8 per cent of global CO2 emissions today (3.47 per cent of cumulative global carbon emissions since 1750), but calculated per capita for a 1.44 billion population, the country can only be considered a lesser polluter and hence it may feel emboldened to speak up for the Global South as it has at COP29, freely pointing out how the rich nations may be ganging up to deny equitability in a stingy way in a matter so crucial to the survival of the world as we know it.