MADRID – The federal government is pushing to ensure it can never be held accountable for that damage brought on by global warming in vulnerable countries.
In 2023, countries agreed that references to ‘loss and damage’ in the Paris Agreement would not supply the grounds for any liability and compensation.
A US proposal being circulated at Cop25 talks in Madrid, which CHN understands hasn't yet been formally submitted to the UN, would extend the liability waiver to mentions of loss and damage in decision texts underneath the UNFCCC convention, the final decision-making body at UN Climate Change.
The US position, the text which CHN has seen, also proposes that all countries, including those not party to Paris, meet the requirements to serve around the executive committee governing loss and damage negotiations. The White House has formally began the process of pulling the united states from the Paris deal, but the country will stay part of the UNFCCC.
The move could allow the US to possess a say on the governance from the loss and damage mechanism and reflects the US' intention to carry on to wield influence on the talks.
The US has repeatedly sought to prevent any liability and compensation claims. The nation accounts for almost another of the gases now heating the earth. The US delegation declined to comment.
There isn't any indication that poorer countries intend to demand compensation during Cop25. But developing countries fear the position might make it more convenient for rich countries to refuse providing funding to assist vulnerable countries recover from climate impacts.
One developing country diplomat told CHN there was a shared view among vulnerable countries that together with a waiver on liability and compensation in the Cop25 decision was “a no go”. This, he said, turn into a red line when the US pressed ahead, potentially threatening a broader discussion on loss and damage.
Who should pay to help countries impacted by extreme weather events and slow-onset impacts such as sea level rise, is really a question at the top of the agenda at the Madrid meeting.
The 2013 international framework to deal with loss and damage, known as the Warsaw International Mechanism, expires for review and countries are due to agree how this body should be governed and, crucially, financed.
Rich countries, and particularly the united states, have long dragged their feet around the issue.
Vulnerable countries are calling for funding choices to be explored, such as the development of a bespoke funding facility.
The issue continues to be the subject of long running disputes over whether or not this ought to be handled as part of UN climate change convention (UNFCCC) or Paris Agreement meetings.
Harjeet Singh, global add global warming for ActionAid, told Climate Home News: “As civil society, we are completely outraged. There is nothing worse that can take place in this space.”
Singh said the proposal would “cripple the whole architecture of the mechanism that's designed to help vulnerable countries”.
“If [the US] won't play the game, why would it continue to direct the guidelines from the game,” he added.
