He European Climate Commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, recognized during a debate in the European Parliament this Thursday that although have been given important stepsthe commitment reached at the COP30 climate summit in Belém (Brazil) falls short of mitigating the consequences of climate change. He has admitted it amid criticism from the left for lack of ambition, and from the right, for excess. The final document of COP30 does not include any mention of the fossil fuels nor of solutions to leave oil, gas and coal behind.
Hoekstra has assured that “important progress” has been achieved at the Belém summit, if the whole is analyzed. But the commissioner has also recognized that “if we analyze the figures and the real needs of the world in terms of mitigation and adaptation, it is evident that “more could have been done”.
The European Commissioner for Climate, Wopke Hoekstra, admits that “more could have been done” but assures that “there is a will” to end fossil fuels
In reference to one of the most controversial points of the final declaration, the lack of agreement on fossil fuels, Hoekstra has defended that steps have been taken regarding COP28 and has assured that there is a “clear” will to “abandon fossil fuels”, although he acknowledges that “it would have been better” to achieve an explicit reference in the text.
Hoekstra has also shown surprised, “to put it diplomatically”, because there is a discussion about whether it should be addressed the gap between the national contribution to emissions reduction and climate objectives. On the other hand, a success the commitment to finance the fight against change climatic reached the summit.
“It is noted that this It is clearly a responsibility that falls, first of all, on developed countriesbut those developing countries that can afford it must also contribute,” said Hoekstra. The commissioner highlighted in particular the importance of tripling the funds dedicated to supporting the most vulnerable territories to the consequences of climate change, who are often those who contribute the least to its causes.
“The final document is not perfect, but there has been important progress,” the popular Portuguese also defended. Lydia Pereirahead of the European Parliament delegation at the summit. “It has been Europe, together with the United Kingdom, who “did not abandon the strategy to leave fossil fuels behind”Pereira insisted. For the Portuguese, the EU is the example that The economy can be decarbonized without giving up growth.
Disappointment on the left
Much harder have been their socialist, liberal, green and left colleagues about the results of the meeting. He Dutch social democrat Mohammed Chahim has accused the EU of contribute their lack of coherence to the problem. “Talking about reducing emissions without mentioning fossil fuels is like talking about lung cancer prevention without talking about tobacco,” Chahim said.
The Swedish liberal Emma Wiesner has directly held responsible the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, of undermining the EU’s negotiating position. In a press conference after the G20 summit in South Africa which was held in parallel, the German assured that They were not fighting “fossil fuels”but against the emissions they generate”.
“I’m sorry, but I disagree: we are fighting against fossil fuels. They are the reason for global warming and the climate crisis we find ourselves in. It is intolerable to say otherwise,” he said. Also the co-leader of the Greens, Bas Eickhouthas criticized von der Leyen’s statements. “Europe defended him in Belém, but in South Africa questioned whether we should rather talk about fossil fuel emissionsinstead of the fossil fuels themselves,” said the Dutchman.
The liberal has described the outcome of the summit as “disappointing” and the European delegation for having defended a “weak” and “disorganized” posture. While Eickhout wonders what Europe will do now. “Next year, there will be a map for the gradual elimination of fossil fuels at European level,” recalled the co-leader of the Greens, “We expect an ambitious plan.”
Excess ambition for the right
For the far right, however, too much ambition and the answer is not multilateralism but more nationalism. “This is not the right tool to solve the world’s climate problems,” he said about COP30. French MP Mathilde Adrouet of Patriots for Europe. “The problems resulting from globalization are not solved with more globalization,” he insisted, calling the emissions quota trading market “green neocolonialism.”
Czech conservative MEP Alexander Vondra has described the mandate with which the Europeans traveled to the summit of “arrogant”, “wrong”, “unworkable” and “overly ambitious”. Vondra accuses the EU of having given in to the interests of others instead of defending its own. “The whole world laughs at us. We have become a cash register.”said the Czech.
The Polish Nations for Europe, Ewa Zajączkowskahas assured that “no one wants to destroy our economy”, in reference to the progressive elimination of the use of fossil fuels. At the same time, has defended the use of nuclear energy over renewable energy as an alternative.
Subscribe to continue reading
