COP28 draft resolution: Tougher on fossil fuel but still no ‘phase out’

Published

2 years ago

December 13, 2023

admin

A new draft of a global deal from the COP28 climate summit is a “sorely needed improvement” on tackling fossil fuels, WWF has said, after a previous version sparked outcry.

However there is still no specific reference to the phase out of fossil fuels.

The UN’s climate body published the proposed text of the deal early on Wednesday morning after negotiations massively overran in Dubai.

Instead of the phrase “phase out” the proposal discussed “transitioning away” from fossil fuels, beginning this decade.

If adopted, it would mark the first time in three decades of COP climate summits that nations agree on a concerted move away from oil, gas and coal – products that currently account for around 80% of global energy.

Stephen Cornelius, WWF Deputy Global Climate and Energy Lead, said: “This draft is a sorely needed improvement from the last version, which rightly caused outrage.

“The language on fossil fuels is much improved, but still falls short of calling for the full phase out of coal, oil and gas.

“The text calls on all countries to be guided by IPCC climate science and the aim of limiting global warming to 1.5C, but the guidance is not fully aligned with this aim. For a liveable planet we need a full phase out of all fossil fuels.”

However the draft received a warmer welcome from others.

Norway’s minister for climate and the environment Espen Barth Eide said: “It is the first time that the world unites around such a clear text on the need to transition away from fossil fuels.

“It has been the elephant in the room. At last we address it head on.”

Melanie Robinson, Global Climate Program Director, World Resources Institute, also welcomed the text saying: “This text makes a clear call for the world to transition away from fossil fuels and accelerate action this decade.

“This would dramatically move the needle in the fight against climate change and overcome immense pressure from oil and gas interests.”

The proposed deal would specifically call for “transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner… so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.”

The document recognised “the need for deep, rapid and sustained reductions in GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions in line with 1.5C pathways” and called upon nations to take notice.

The actions suggested included:

• Tripling renewable energy capacity globally and doubling the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030;

• Rapidly phasing down unabated coal and limiting the permitting of new and unabated coal power generation;

• Accelerating efforts globally towards net zero emissions energy systems, utilising zero and low carbon fuels well before or by around mid-century;

• Transitioning away from fossil fuels in our energy systems, beginning in this decade, in a just, orderly and equitable manner so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science;

• Accelerating zero and low emissions technologies, including, inter alia, renewables, nuclear, abatement and removal technologies, such as carbon capture and utilisation and storage particularly in hard to abate sectors, and low carbon hydrogen production, so as to enhance efforts towards substitution of unabated fossil fuels in energy systems.

• Accelerating and substantially reducing non-CO2 emissions, including, in particular, methane emissions globally by 2030;

• Accelerating emissions reductions from road transport through a range of pathways, including development of infrastructure and rapid deployment of zero emission vehicles;

• Phasing out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transitions, as soon as possible.

More than 100 nations had called for the phrase “phase out” to be used regarding fossil fuels in the resolution, but this language was watered down.

Intensive sessions went well into the small hours of Wednesday morning.

Then, the United Arab Emirates-led presidency, fronted by Sultan al Jaber presented delegates from nearly 200 nations a new central document – called the global stocktake – just after sunrise in Dubai.

It’s the second version presented in about two weeks.

Some of the language in previous versions of the draft that most upset nations calling for dramatic action to address climate change was altered.

Actions that had previously been presented as an optional “could” changed to a bit more direct “calls on parties to.”

After a quick de-brief, Union of Concerned Scientists climate and energy policy director Rachel Cleetus said it was “definitely an improvement” over earlier versions that environmental advocacy groups like hers had massively criticised.

The aim of the global stocktake is to help nations align their national climate plans with the Paris agreement.

World

Why do so many from around the world try to cross the English Channel?

Published

6 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

Why do so many from around the world try to cross the English Channel?

While the politicians talk, so many people come from around the world to try to get across the Channel on small boats. But why?

Why make such a perilous crossing to try to get to a country that seems to be getting increasingly hostile to asylum seekers?

As the British and French leaders meet, with small boats at the forefront of their agenda, we came to northern France to get some answers.

It is not a new question, but it is peppered with fresh relevance.

Over the course of a morning spent around a migrant camp in Dunkirk, we meet migrants from Gaza, Iraq, Eritrea, South Sudan, Sri Lanka and beyond.

Some are fearful, waving us away; some are happy to talk. Very few are comfortable to be filmed.

All but one man – who says he’s come to the wrong place and actually wants to claim asylum in Paris – are intent on reaching Britain.

They see the calm seas, feel the light winds – perfect conditions for small boat crossings.

John has come here from South Sudan. He tells me he’s now 18 years old. He left his war-torn home nation just before his 16th birthday. He feels that reaching Britain is his destiny.

“England is my dream country,” he says. “It has been my dream since I was at school. It’s the country that colonised us and when I get there, I will feel like I am home.

“In England, they can give me an opportunity to succeed or to do whatever I need to do in my life. I feel like I am an English child, who was born in Africa.”

He says he would like to make a career in England, either as a journalist or in human resources, and, like many others we meet, is at pains to insist he will work hard.

The boat crossing is waved away as little more than an inconvenience – a trifle compared with the previous hardships of his journey towards Britain.

We meet a group of men who have all travelled from Gaza, intent on starting new lives in Britain and then bringing their families over to join them.

One man, who left Gaza two years ago, tells me that his son has since been shot in the leg “but there is no hospital for him to go to”.

Next to him, a man called Abdullah says he entered Europe through Greece and stayed there for months on end, but was told the Greek authorities would never allow him to bring over his family.

Britain, he thinks, will be more accommodating. “Gaza is being destroyed – we need help,” he says.

A man from Eritrea tells us he is escaping a failing country and has friends in Britain – he plans to become a bicycle courier in either London or Manchester.

He can’t stay in France, he says, because he doesn’t speak French. The English language is presented as a huge draw for many of the people we talk to, just as it had been during similar conversations over the course of many years.

I ask many of these people why they don’t want to stay in France, or another safe European country.

Some repeat that they cannot speak the language and feel ostracised. Another says that he tried, and failed, to get a residency permit in both France and Belgium.

But this is also, clearly, a flawed survey. Last year, five times as many people sought asylum in France as in Britain.

And French critics have long insisted that Britain, a country without a European-style ID card system, makes itself attractive to migrants who can “disappear”.

A young man from Iraq, with absolutely perfect English, comes for a chat. He oozes confidence and a certain amount of mischief.

It has taken him only seven days to get from Iraq to Dunkirk; when I ask how he has made the trip so quickly, he shrugs. “Money talks”.

He looks around him. “Let me tell you – all of these people you see around you will be getting to Britain and the first job they get will be in the black market, so they won’t be paying any tax.

“Back in the day in Britain, they used to welcome immigrants very well, but these days I don’t think they want to, because there’s too many of them coming by boat. Every day it’s about seven or 800 people. That’s too many people.”

“But,” I ask, “if those people are a problem – then what makes you different? Aren’t you a problem too?”

He shakes his head emphatically. “I know that I’m a very good guy. And I won’t be a problem. I’ll only stay in Britain for a few years and then I’ll leave again.”

A man from Sri Lanka says he “will feel safe” when he gets to Britain; a tall, smiling man from Ethiopia echoes the sentiment: “We are not safe in our home country so we have come all this way,” he says. “We want to work, to be part of Britain.”

Emmanuel is another from South Sudan – thoughtful and eloquent. He left his country five years ago – “at the start of COVID” – and has not seen his children in all that time. His aim is to start a new life in Britain, and then to bring his family to join him.

He is a trained electrical engineer, but says he could also work as a lorry driver. He is adamant that Britain has a responsibility to the people of its former colony.

“The British came to my country – colonising, killing, raping,” he said. “And we didn’t complain. We let it happen.

“I am not the problem. I won’t fight anyone; I want to work. And if I break the laws – if any immigrant breaks the laws – then fine, deport them.

“I know it won’t be easy – some people won’t like me, some people will. But England is my dream.”

World

Trump applying ‘heavy pressure’ on Netanyahu to end war in Gaza

Published

15 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

Trump applying 'heavy pressure' on Netanyahu to end war in Gaza

US President Donald Trump is putting “heavy” pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to end the war in Gaza, two sources close to the ceasefire negotiations have told Sky News.

One US source said: “The US pressure on Israel has begun, and tonight it will be heavy.”

The source, who is not authorised to speak publicly, was referring to the White House dinner on Monday night between Trump and Netanyahu.

A second Middle Eastern diplomatic source agreed that the American pressure on Israel would be intense.

Netanyahu arrived in Washington DC in the early hours of Monday morning and held meetings on Monday with Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Middle East envoy, and Marco Rubio, the secretary of state and national security adviser.

The Israeli prime minister plans to be in Washington until Thursday with meetings on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.

Trump has made clear his desire to bring the Gaza conflict to an end.

However, he has never articulated how a lasting peace, which would satisfy both the Israelis and Palestinians, could be achieved.

His varying comments about ownership of Gaza, moving Palestinians out of the territory and permanent resettlement, have presented a confusing policy.

Situation for Palestinians worse than ever

Over the coming days, we will see the extent to which Trump demands that Netanyahu accepts the current Gaza ceasefire deal, even if it falls short of Israel’s war aims – the elimination of Hamas.

The strategic objective to permanently remove Hamas seems always to have been impossible. Hamas as an entity was the extreme consequence of the Israeli occupation.

The Palestinians’ challenge has not gone away, and the situation for Palestinians now is worse than it has ever been in Gaza and also the West Bank. It is not clear how Trump plans to square that circle.

Trump’s oft-repeated desire to “stop the killing” is sincere. Those close to him often emphasise this. He is also looking to cement his legacy as a peacemaker. He genuinely craves the Nobel Peace Prize.

In this context, the complexities of conflicts – in Ukraine or Gaza – are often of secondary importance to the president.

If Netanyahu can be persuaded to end the war, what would he need?

The hostages back – for sure. That would require agreement from Hamas. They would only agree to this if they have guarantees on Gaza’s future and their own future. More circles to square.

Was White House dinner a key moment?

The Monday night dinner could have been a key moment for the Middle East. Two powerful men in the Blue Room of the White House, deciding the direction of the region.

Will it be seen as the moment the region was remoulded? But to whose benefit?

Trump is a dealmaker with an eye on the prize. But Netanyahu is a political master; they don’t call him “the magician” for nothing.

Trump makes decisions instinctively. He can shift position quickly and often listens to the last person in the room. Right now – that person is Netanyahu.

Gaza is one part of a jigsaw of challenges, which could become opportunities.

Diplomatic normalisation between Israel and the Arab world is a prize for Trump and could genuinely secure him the Nobel Peace Prize.

But without the Gaza piece, the jigsaw is incomplete.

World

IDF presence in Gaza ‘only issue’ still to be resolved in push for Israel-Hamas ceasefire, Sky News understands

Published

15 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

IDF presence in Gaza 'only issue' still to be resolved in push for Israel-Hamas ceasefire, Sky News understands

Only one issue remains unresolved in the push to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza, according to Sky sources.

Intense negotiations are taking place in Qatar in parallel with key talks in Washington between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Two sources with direct knowledge of the negotiations have told Sky News that disagreement between Israel and Hamas remains on the status and presence of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza.

The two sides have bridged significant differences on several other issues, including the process of delivering humanitarian aid and Hamas’s demand that the US guarantees to ensure Israel doesn’t unilaterally resume the war when the ceasefire expires in 60 days.

On the issue of humanitarian aid, Sky News understands that a third party that neither Hamas nor Israel has control over will be used in areas from which the IDF withdraws.

This means that the controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) – jointly run by an American organisation and Israel – will not be able to operate anywhere where the IDF is not deployed. It will limit GHF expansion plans.

It is believed the United Nations or other recognised humanitarian organisations will adopt a greater role.

On the issue of a US guarantee to prevent Israel restarting the war, Sky News understands that a message was passed to Hamas by Dr Bishara Bahbah, a Palestinian American who has emerged as a key back channel in the negotiations.

The message appears to have been enough to convince Hamas that President Trump will prevent Israel from restarting the conflict.

However, there is no sense from any of the developments over the course of the past day about what the future of Gaza looks like longer-term.

Final challenge is huge

The last remaining disagreement is, predictably, the trickiest to bridge.

Israel’s central war aim, beyond the return of the hostages, is the total elimination of Hamas as a military and political organisation. The withdrawal of the IDF, partial or total, could allow Hamas to regroup.

One way to overcome this would be to provide wider guarantees of clear deliverable pathways to a viable future for Palestinians.

But there is no sense from the negotiations of any longer-term commitments on this issue.

Two key blocks have been resolved over the past 24 hours but the final challenge is huge.

The conflict in Gaza erupted when Hamas attacked southern Israel in October 2023, killing around 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli figures. Some 20 hostages are believed to remain alive in Gaza.

Israel has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry, which does not distinguish between combatants and civilians.