BRICS by BRICS : Time to save the climate with bold moves

Enlarged BRICS Summit at Belem lays roadmap for success at COP30

The global state of stupor regarding fighting climate change was one of the key issues discussed at the 17th BRICS Summit that was held recently in Rio de Janiero in Brazil. Coming barely four months before COP30, the annual global climate change summit, the Rio de Janiero Declaration does lay out a roadmap and also underlines the need for BRICS and the entire developing world to take the issue in its hands as the rich world continues to be in a state of inertia over the impending catastrophe.

In the last fortnight, two meetings were held in two different parts of the world on dealing with climate change and though there was sub-group of participants that was common to both the meetings, the outcomes strikingly varying.

The first meeting, a larger gathering, failed to proceed beyond empty, vague and uncertain words, while the second was the firm and crisp declaration of a united intent to take head on the challenge of advancing global climate change negotiations. One of the meetings was held in the Global North, Germany and the other in the Global South, Brazil. No points for guessing which meeting was all gas and which focussed on getting the job done.

The 62^nd session of Subsidiary Bodies called SB 62-of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), that was held at Bonn in Germany, was meant to serve as a crucial point for advancing negotiations in the global climate change summit, COP30, that will be held in the city of Belem in Brazil in November.

The air in Bonn during SB62 was thick with technical jargon, procedural wrangling, and the unmistakable scent of stagnation. The only thing that was truly heating during the 10-days was the planet outside the conference halls.

Held in the shadow of shattered global weather records of global average temperatures, and amidst the geopolitical cacophony echoing all around the world and emanating from another parallel self-serving gathering of the G7 Summit in Canada, the Bonn climate talks delivered a masterclass in incrementalism while the world screams for revolution. This wasn’t just a meeting, it was a stark diagnosis of a failing system.

Pessimism is not the intent of the author, but stems from the diagnosis of the longest inertia in the history of mankind. And it is coming from a former UN expert who had double distinction, of being in the saddle of more than 20 years of implementation of uniquely successful  International Treaty called Montreal Protocol to save the Ozone Layer and witnessing three decades of complete inertia on a life-threatening climate crisis. And all couched in ‘negotiations’, the diplomatic term for complete inaction!

Rumblings in Bonn

Reviewing the outcome of Bonn meeting, just like the previous two dozen similar meetings is like examining  anatomy of inaction and painting  a depressingly familiar picture across the entire canvas.

Let us start with Climate  Finance, the motor of climate action, which remains ever-sputtering. The developed and developing nations remained deadlocked on the critical New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance, that was set to replace the vastly unmet promise of the developed nations providing USD 100 billion per year to the developing countries.

While the technical work progressed, the chasm between the need, has now risen to over USD 1 trillion in grants.  What is now offered by the developed countries to the developing countries cleverly includes loans, private finance and not just grants and the gulf of differences on the most important issue continues to widen, while the global impacts of climate are crossing new records.

Today, in the era of tariff wars and abundant manoeuvring of  scarce rare-earth supply by few endowed by Mother Nature, the pledge of USD 300 billion in climate finance that was agreed at COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, is all set to be swept away by the flood of war drones and bomber-aircraft. Discussions on operationalisation of the Loss and Damage Fund  remained bogged down in differences over governance and access, while vulnerable nations saw their people and land drowned and  burnt.

The enhanced Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) needed as revealed by the first ever Global Stock Take (GST) felt like rearranging deck chairs on the ill-fated Titanic. The current NDCs puts the world firmly on track for a catastrophic rise in temperature of 3.5°C or even more of warming as against limit of 1.5-2.0°C stipulated in Paris Climate Agreement.

The climate-meeting in Bonn offered little evidence of the radical course correction that is needed to set mitigation on track. The earlier deadline for the submission of new NDCs for 2035 was February 2025 and as of July, as many as 95 pc of countries have failed to submit new NDCs. The deadline for the submission is now extended to September 2025.

Despite undeniable evidence of accelerating impacts, the negotiations on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) moved at a glacial pace. Agreeing on metrics, tracking progress, and crucially, linking adaptation finance to ground-level needs, proved elusive. Adaptation remains the chronically underfunded, politically neglected cousin of mitigation.

On a less pessimistic note, the rules for carbon markets (Article 6) are getting formulated with speed that provides the reasons of some rays of optimism. But many analysts say that they remain mired in quick sand and concerns over their environmental integrity and human rights. Without robust rules, these market mechanisms risk becoming loopholes, leading to new problems rather than providing solutions to the existing problems. The mass movement of cutting of trees to plant new trees only to get carbon credit is one of the examples of governance loophole.

The UNFCCC’s own statements attempted to put a brave face on ‘technical progress’, but the underlying subtext was clear, the political will to drive transformative action was conspicuously absent. Media attending the SB 62 noted, the ‘prevailing geopolitical wars’ that include soaking up of resources, fracturing cooperation due to trade-wars, and a global leadership vacuum amidst defining crisis of our age.

The Kananaskis Hills echo G7’s Arsenal Expansion

The G7 Summit at Kananaskis, in Alberta province of Canada, held parallel to SB62, perfectly encapsulated the hypocrisy of the rich nations collectively. While expressing ‘alarm’ over climate impacts and reaffirming commitments to NetZero, the G7 leaders simultaneously prioritised massive defence spending increases, from about 2 pc of their GDP to 5 pc, which in currency terms means rising from USD 485 billion to more than USD 1 trillion every year.

With their focus clearly on acquiring weapons of war, there was little appetite or even pretence by the rich about the urgent need to wage the war on climate change and arm the world’s poor nations against the catastrophe that is headed towards us in no uncertain terms. It underscored a brutal truth, that while the rich world readily opened their purse strings to spend on their preferred weapons of mass destruction, but have had little to spare for tools that the world has desperately been searching for to save itself from impending global climate doom.

BRICS: The Disruptor in the Wings?

Enter BRICS exactly when SB62 delegates exit. The grouping’s recent statements, particularly emphasising climate justice, common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) with Respective Capabilities (RC) and the need for vastly scaled-up, accessible finance from developed nations, resonate in contrast with powerful frustrations emanating from Bonn. Their critique of Western-dominated financial institutions and calls for a multipolar world order present a potential challenge to the status quo.

As we move towards COP30 in Belem, Brazil, in the heart of the vulnerable Amazon and a key BRICS member, the bloc’s role has now become a pivot of survival. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President of Brazil, has already demonstrated the reduction in deforestation and vows to stop it completely by 2030. Brazil has pledged 53 pc fall in emissions by 2030 compared with 2005. He is resolved that COP30 will make a difference even though he is yet to overcome the huge challenge of reducing Brazilian dependence on oil.

On its part, South Africa has pledged Net Zero by 2050, Russia as well as China by 2060 and India by 2070. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has led the country to do more than the pledged in NDCs mainly by large elimination of  use of fossil fuel in energy production President Xi of China has taken unparallel leadership in renewable energy not only in China but also across the world.

With the momentum generated at the Rio Summit, the BRICS nations should now rebuild global hope and revive the climate commitment before COP30 from buried remnants.

Their first objective and challenge is to mobilise alternative finance, by moving beyond rhetoric to create substantial, accessible climate finance mechanisms for the Global South, challenging the West’s faltering delivery. They have the opportunity to demonstrate that while G7 busy in national and geo-security, BRICS is committed to climate and global  security.

The BRICS nations, especially with the expanded grouping, can now drive collective ambition and this would need the largest emitters within BRICS, notably China, India and Russia to significantly enhance their own NDCs and pressure others, proving developing nations can lead and not just demand.

The next step for the developing world or BRICS nations is to champion systemic change. The BRICS countries should push aggressively in Belem for fundamental reforms in climate finance architecture and stronger accountability. The grouping represents a vast potential counterweight, a source of pressure for the ambitious  ‘Just Transition’ constantly echoed and then perennially ignored in places like Bonn. But having potential does not mean taking action.

BRICS indeed can go beyond what UNFCCC Executive Secretary advocated after SB62, namely Faster, Further, Fairer. But all that advocacy would melt in a warming planet without any framework of force and here the BRICS nations can turn to the concept whose time has come -International Climate Court ( ICC) to provide that ‘Framework of Force’ for nations to collectively take punitive measures for defaulters of the climate pledge to set the process on rails. The teeth of Paris Climate Treaty need to be activated for any credible effort to take place in getting nations and businesses to do as they have pledged.

While enforcement remains the Achilles’ heel of international law, potential tools could include imposing financial penalties for not meeting the pledges to Loss and Damage Fund as well as sanctions, targetted trade restrictions, which is a highly contentious but potentially powerful lever. Defaulters and frauders need to be named and shamed and brought to the justice. A ‘Just Transition’ needs to have mechanism to deliver justice.

Indeed, concerns over national sovereignty and geopolitical vetoes especially through the UN Security Council mean that any kind of enforcement mechanism for climate crimes  could provide an immense legal and political minefield. Yet, the alternative is equally stark and urgent. Can humanity afford to continue to engage in the voluntary failure for another 30 years and lead to planetary catastrophe? There is no Planet B , but there is a Process B! The question that Bonn avoided but Belem cannot is, “What are the consequences for those failing the planet?”

BRICS can turn Bonn’s Whimper into Belem’s Roar

While the G7 has prioritised guns over green transition and BRICS has positioned itself as a challenger to a failing order, it is time to disrupt the years of  inaction and go beyond tariff-wars. .

If Belem should not be allowed to risk becoming the monument of  our collective failure, the weapons of climate war need to be armed with binding laws, enforced finance, and punitive measures. The road from Bonn to Belem must be paved with far more than just good intentions, it must be built on accountability, enforced justice, and a radical break from the failed politics of the past.

Fortunately , BRICS have the necessary will. In their pursuit of ‘just transition’ it should work with like-minded countries that were invited for BRICS Summit and hold an urgent ‘Redefining Climate Summit’ before COP30 in Belem to let the world know that BRICS does mean business and that they can build on their potential to break the climate blockade.

Talking of time left for action, the global climate clock is very distinct from the global nuclear clock, monitored by some of the NGOs to track how close the world has come to nuclear war. While the nuclear clock is frequently reset back and forth as the global geostrategic pendulum swings between war and peace, the climate clock can only advance towards the D-Day and can be reset only by concrete actions rather than perception of action.

The clock is now at the tip of striking the notes of D-Day, yet the rich world continues to bury its head in sand, hoping that the catastrophe wont arrive. Unfortunately, such leadership is bound to spell catastrophe not just for them, but the entire planet Earth and hence the need for the BRICS nations to take the mantle and lead the world on the only path to safety.

(Rajendra Shende is a former Director UNEP, Founder Director Green TERRE Foundation, coordinating lead author, IPCC that won Nobel peace prize, Prime Mover SCCN, IIT Alumnus. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Media India Group.)