State of Play: As Talks Stall, The Iceberg Is Ahead

With less than 12 hours before a full draft of the new Paris agreement is supposed to emerge, negotiations are in disarray.

The Verb’s Negotiation Compass tracks the progress of seven key issues, in terms of the ambition expressed to tackle them, and the emerging architecture that will facilitate future progress. Here is our assessment of the current state of play:

A better view of the iceberg

Friday 4, December began with the French presidency introducing two texts: a long-form ‘compilation text’ containing all proposed draft language, and a streamlined ‘bridging’ text, which tried to distil compromise positions into a more concise working document. In a positive sign for the French, this unusual move was accepted quickly by the conference, thus commencing a marathon negotiation. But with a full draft text expected by Ministers on Sunday night, time has all but run out for options to be narrowed down. Unfortunately, little progress has been made, with WWF’s Tasneem Essop declaring: “They’re just rearranging the deck chairs on the ship to get a better view of the iceberg”.

The blame game has begun

Countries have completed a media blitz attempting to dictate the public narrative of failure, painting opposition blocs as the problem. The chair of the G77, South Africa, slammed the Umbrella Group for negotiating “in bad faith”, a claim sharply repudiated in what became, in the words of one negotiator a “slinging match”. Whilst the Umbrella Group is attempting to paint Saudi Arabia and India as the chief antagonists, many developed states are refusing to budge on key developing world concerns.

Loss and damage, for instance, is all but dead, with the US hamstrung by the reality of a hostile senate that will veto any legal liability for compensation. Developing countries are reportedly abandoning their goal of 50 per cent of funds towards adaptation. Positive signs of light are present on short-term mitigation and transparency, where agreement is emerging around the need for a unified body to administer a new reporting system. Two issues, however, are threatening to derail the talks: finance and the long-term goal.

Long-term goal

The language around decarbonisation looks to be heading towards “net zero”. A member of the Umbrella Group told The Verb that, on the decarbonisation goal: “For this to be acceptable at home…we need something that’s acceptable to all of the stakeholder groups, and we think that ‘net zero’ is probably that. Though it means much the same thing [as decarbonisation]”. The chief difference between “decarbonisation” and “net zero” is that the latter implies the use of carbon capture technology, which is, when at scale, unproven as yet, and is widely seen as a ploy to avoid genuine mitigation efforts. However, with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warning that decarbonisation will be impossible with carbon capture, this remains a hot button issue.

The least-developed countries bloc today ramped up pressure for the long-term temperature goal to be revised down to 1.5°C. This was a move strongly backed by the Pacific Island nations, and which has gained support from France and Germany. In a nod to their Pacific Island neighbours, and in response to mounting criticism of their low mitigation and financing targets, Australia too has indicated that there should at least be “reference” to 1.5°C. Saudi Arabia compounded its reputation as pariah-of-the-moment by leading the Arab Group in blocking language around 1.5°C. This is unresolved and could go either way, though will likely end up on 2°C.

The long-term goal is one issue that threatens to fracture the G77, with China and India at one end pushing hard to dilute ambition, and the least developed and most vulnerable countries on the other desperate for tougher targets. As chair of the G77, South Africa’s strong condemnation of the Umbrella Group today was seen by one negotiator as a ploy to keep the G77 bloc united by “creating an enemy”.

Finance

At the crux of everything is finance, and at the crux of finance is differentiation. Developed countries appear to have accepted that their commitment to US$100 billion in finance by 2020 must be honoured, with one Umbrella Group negotiator confirming that: “The target will be reached, and reached well before time”. The focus now appears to be shifting to post-2020 finance. Here, the certainty dries up.

Whilst the EU has committed to taking $100 billion as the post-2020 floor, the Umbrella Group refuses to be drawn into the topic, pushing against a quantitative target. Certainly the EU has made clear that its floor promise is not a freebie – in exchange they expect greater mitigation ambition from developing world emitters and an “expanding donor base” after 2020, noting that none of the richest countries in the world are from the EU.

An Umbrella Group proposal that post-2020 financing commitments should come from countries “in a position to do so”, was rebuked by the G77 as a violation of the principle of differentiation. Any move to impose financing obligations on developing countries, even conditional obligations such as might apply to India and China under their future emissions scenarios, is being stonewalled. Even China’s proposed bridging language around financing from countries “willing to do so” was rejected as lacking teeth.

The stoush over finance, like most issues, has cemented into polarised camps, with few countries willing to cede ground at this early stage of the talks. This is to be expected. As one negotiator said privately: “It is a tactical question – when do you start showing your cards?”. It is likely that all countries have come with compromise positions on all the key issues, but in the brinkmanship and grandstanding, no-one has yet blinked.

All eyes are on the presidency

It was clear by midday Friday that the party-driven process had failed to produce an effective working text. When, by the Saturday noon deadline, the conference inevitably fails to produce a text, all eyes will turn to the presidency. The French foreign minister and president of the conference, Laurent Fabius, now faces a crucial test of leadership. By presidential decree, Fabius has the ability to introduce his own version of a draft agreement. Barring momentous breakthrough, he has little other choice. But this is a high stakes move – a similar move was responsible for the failure of the Copenhagen process, and the more recent talks in Bonn October. For this reason, up until now, the French have consistently (and expectedly) denied that they have a backup text.

The veneer appears to be cracking, however. The French ambassador to the US has been flown in to bolster the French diplomatic corps. The Verb has been told of reports that the presidency has been in contact with at least two delegations regarding a presidency text. All signs indicate that the presidency, who until now has revealed nothing about its game-plan, is ready to show at least part of its hand.

In reference to the negotiations, one negotiator declared that: “The beast has been staggering along- they will put it down tomorrow”.