Interactive: the UNFCCC negotiating alliances

Friday 27 November 2015

Rosamund Pearce

Under the surface of polite language and formal procedures, UN talks are more about realpolitik than they first appear.

Every country is out to further their own domestic interests, with weaker political forces banding together to have a chance of being heard against the more dominant players, such as the US, Russia and China.

As talks commence in Paris, we’ve mapped which countries are allies, and which nations have feet in more than one camp.

Issues at stake

There are various issues that divide and unite countries: the legal form of the new agreement; how far the deal should differentiate between rich, poor and emerging nations; who should be responsible for providing climate finance; and how to deal with the impacts of climate change now and in the future.

Traditionally, the biggest divide has been between rich and poor countries.

Less developed countries have suggested it is unfair that they should bear responsibility for solving a problem they did not cause, while developed nations such as the US wanted to avoid commitments that they believed might burden their economies.

But the less developed nations are far from a unified bloc.

In fact, they comprise an increasingly complex and interconnected web of negotiating groups, with a range of priorities and positions. In some cases, this has seen them side more with progressive developed nations than with their other developing compatriots.

A changing political scene

Last year, Carbon Brief reported on how the political scene was becoming increasingly fragmented, with old alliances abandoned in favour of new groups.

But the political groupings inside the UN can change quickly.

Until recently, the G77+China bloc was seen as becoming increasingly diverse, as its 134 member states pulled in different directions.

But the group performed a complete volte-face at the recent negotiations in Bonn, raising the spectre of a united and powerful developed country bloc that could hold a vital key to unlocking a successful deal in Paris.

This was precipitated by their increasing frustration over the issue of financial support, as they pushed back heavily against what they perceived as an unwarranted attempt to widen the base of which countries can and should donate climate finance.

The current draft of the UN text illustrates this sharp divide, with two completely contrasting options on how the issue of finance should be taken forward.

The group was also reunified, others argued, by the controversial draft text put forward by the co-chairs of the process, which G77 argued was skewed in favour of developed nations.

Other alliances

At one end of the spectrum lies the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), a coalition of small island and low-lying coastal nations, who have an especially pressing interest in the fight against climate change. Their aim is to lobby for the strongest measures to combat climate change — a position that has often seen them forge informal alliances with the EU in the past.

At the other end is the Like-Minded Developing Countries, a negotiating bloc with contains major oil-producing states, such as Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. This group has strongly rejected the idea that the new deal should contain equal obligations for developed and developing nations, and has pushed for the continuation of a strict division between the two.

As some developing countries have experienced rapid economic growth they have found it easier to move away from the bigger groups, to better push their own agenda. Chief among these groups is BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) an influential bloc of four newly industrialised nations.

Other alliances include the African Group and the Least Developed Countries group, both of which hope to prioritise the issue of financial support.

What does all this mean for Paris?

Countries have set a deadline to agree a new global climate treaty at a conference in Paris this December.

Ultimately, countries must be able to bury their political differences in order for the conference in Paris to be a success.

At the last session in Bonn, groups were encouraged to come forward with “bridging” solutions — a challenge to which only the LDCs and AOSIS have risen so far.

There is still time over the coming two weeks for further shifts in rhetoric and alliances. Indeed, if nations are going to succeed in signing a deal, countries are going to have to soften their stances, reach compromise and abandon some of the issues they have fought for over the last five years.

What will be important is that no country feels it has lost everything — no negotiating team wants to tell their country that they have failed to secure their interests when they return home in just over two weeks.

For a deal to be struck, groups will have to find a balance that allows everyone to spin the deal as a success story, while swallowing some inevitable disappointments along the way.

Sources: list of countries by population from Wikipedia, list of Annex I countries from the UNFCCC, negotiating bloc membership taken from their respective websites (detailed below).

Negotiating blocs

UN negotiating groups:

Other groups in the climate change process:

🗂️ back to the index