Climate change can exacerbate resource scarcity, contribute to migration, heighten existing conflicts and cause other threats to climate security. Mitigating and adapting to the consequences of climate change is particularly vital for developing countries, predominantly associated with the Global South. These have limited resources to address climate change-related risks whilst being highly vulnerable to them. Ensuring a ‘well below 2 degrees Celsius’ scenario is crucial in a time where extreme weather events are already intensifying, and this will require extensive funding.
On the 24th of November, COP29 - dubbed the ‘finance COP’ - came to an end after two weeks of heated negotiations on how to ensure that climate financing reaches emerging and developing economies. Despite the international community's focus on negotiating a ‘new collective quantified goal’ (NCQG) for climate finance, other issues such as the climate-conflict-peace nexus also featured high on the agenda in Baku.
Below we highlight some key developments from the COP and their implications for international efforts to enhance climate-related resilience:
Diplomatic Rows and Obstacles
To start things off, it is worth recalling the diplomatic rows and geopolitical tensions that overshadowed negotiations in Baku:
As widely reported in the media, an Azeri COP chief executive was filmed promoting fossil fuel deals at the conference before it had even started. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev called the country’s oil reserves a ‘gift from God’ on the first day of the conference. Coupled with Saudi Arabia’s blatant obstructionist tactics, the final documents failed to endorse a transition away from fossil fuels. The greenhouse gas emissions from the fossil fuel industry are expected to cause massive disturbances to the climate, with potentially dramatic consequences for climate security across the globe, including in Europe.
Following France’s strong support for Armenia in its land dispute with Azerbaijan, Aliyev also accused French President Emmanuel Macron of ‘brutally’ killing citizens during recent protests in New Caledonia. Aliyev also referred to the French Pacific Island territories as ‘colonies’, causing France to withdraw its top negotiators from the summit. The feud also heightened tensions with EU officials, with EU climate chief Wopke Hoekstra defending France on social media.
Adding to this, Argentinian President Javier Milei, a strong Trump supporter, withdrew negotiators from the conference midway through the first week. He cited a conversation with the incoming US President, who plans to withdraw from the Paris Agreement (again) once in office. US election results weighed heavily on negotiators’ minds whilst settling on a NCQG for climate finance – with contributions by the Trump Administration being uncertain at best.
Financial Divisions but Carbon Consensus
Despite these frictions, the most advanced economies finally agreed to pledge a minimum of $300 billion a year by 2035 to help developing countries cope with climate change and transition away from fossil fuels.
This highly controversial figure triples the previously agreed upon $100 billion target set in 2009. However, it still falls short of the $1.3 trillion that Global South countries say they require to adequately adapt to the onset of climate change. Lack of funding for climate adaptation has severe consequences for people living with the impacts of climate change. Just this April, Kenya was hit by a wave of severe floods linked to a particularly intense El Niño event, destroying farmland and water infrastructure, displacing over 500 000 households and causing 200 deaths. The fund will also include a mixture of both grants and loans, sparking discussions over climate justice.
While many found the financial outcomes disappointing, parties did make a breakthrough decision on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement after four years of stalled negotiations. It marks the implementation of UN-wide standards for a centralised carbon market, enabling the flexible trade of carbon credits between countries. If implemented context-sensitively, this agreement could unlock up to $250 billion to meet climate targets, nearly doubling current ambitions and enhancing climate protection efforts in vulnerable regions.
Climate, Peace and Conflict in Spotlight
Even though this year’s focus was on negotiating the NCQG, the climate, peace and conflict nexus featured high on the agenda, too. Among the nine declarations made before the start of the conference, the first declaration - the Truce Appeal pledge - highlighted the ‘interconnectedness of climate action and global peace’ as pointed out by COP29 President-Designate Mukhtar Babayev.
Day 5 marked a thematic day entirely dedicated to Peace, Relief, and Recovery, to highlight the link between climate-related efforts, stability and peacebuilding. On this day, the COP29 Presidency together with Egypt, Italy, Germany, Uganda, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom launched the Baku Call on Climate Action for Peace, Relief, and Recovery (BCCAP). This milestone initiative recognises that climate change’s adverse effects – such as water scarcity, food insecurity, land degradation, displacement, and livelihood disruptions – can act as catalysts for conflict and instability.
A side-event hosted by Clingendael's Planetary Security Initiative, Energy for Peace Partners, the Stanley Center for Peace and Security and the Stimson Center zoomed-in on this topic. The discussion focused on the potential role of renewable energy for promoting peace in fragile and conflict-affected settings. Informed by a joint policy brief published ahead of the COP, the side-event highlighted the importance of integrating the climate, energy and peacebuilding fields, and of facilitating private investment in high-risk environments.
The BCCAP and the establishment of platforms like the Baku Climate and Peace Action Hub could be a significant step towards this by coordinating technical support and knowledge-sharing along the climate-conflict nexus. However, specific commitments to unlock necessary finance and develop concrete projects in conflict-ridden countries still need to take shape. Still, the outcomes highlight the growing awareness for peace-sensitive climate strategies, and the need to scale-up and de-risk investments in regions affected by conflict and instability.
In Closing
Reflecting an international climate characterized by geopolitical turbulences and fragmentation, the diplomatic tensions overshadowing this year's COP certainly did not facilitate more ambitious pledges to scaling-up climate finance. The extent to which parties will be able to appease diplomatic relations in the coming years is decisive for the trajectory of international climate cooperation. Nonetheless, important progress was made to recognise the critical intersection between climate action, conflict, and peace. Concrete efforts will have to be made and sustained in the coming years, particularly in conflict-ridden contexts that struggle to access public and private investments. Last but not least, though the NCQG has been disappointing to many, the tripling of the global climate pledge is testament to continuing efforts in international climate cooperation.
In times that put increasing pressure on global forums like COP, a disappointing deal still is better than no deal.
Suggestions for further reading
Unveiling Challenges and Gaps in Climate Finance in Conflict Areas
Why Renewable Energy Matters in the Context of Peace and Stability
The security blind spot: Cascading climate impacts and tipping points threaten national security
Cultivating Change: Regenerative Agriculture and Peacebuilding in South-central Somalia
This article was written by PSI’s Esther Futterer.