China, India and Saudi Arabia are all part of the like-minded group of developing countries that Pacheco spoke for. No one has responded to CNN’s request for comment on their position.
He argued that developing countries should not have the same goals as rich ones that have played a greater historical role in the climate crisis. And he accused rich nations of trying to “transfer responsibility” to the global south.
“History issues and history are very important to understand and put in context in the discussion of ambition,” he said. He added that it would be impossible for many countries in the group to achieve net-zero emissions by the middle of the century.
The issue at the heart of this feeling is money. He made it clear that it would be impossible to make such a transition if rich nations did not start paying their fair share – including for developing countries, to adapt to the effects of the crisis. Developing countries have repeatedly complained about so-called climate finance this week, and that and have proved to be the biggest problem stopping the negotiations.
Catherine Abreu, founder of non-profit Destination Zero, which works on climate justice issues, said Bolivia’s announcement was essentially a negotiating tactic and that the underlying problem was more to do with demanding more funds.
“The draft text was such a remedial focus, so I think the message was a breeze,” Abreau told CNN, saying the countries’ message meant other parts of the deal would be “held hostage.”
The proposal to delete the mitigation section “is clearly a slap in the face to people suffering from the climate crisis,” said Teresa Anderson, a spokeswoman for the Climate Action Network.
Frans Timmermans, Vice-President of the European Commission, ridiculed the call as illogical, saying that “there is no money on the planet” that could develop adaptation to withstand the extreme temperature rise that would come if the mitigation was scrapped.
The rich world still lacks a financing promise
At a conference desperately trying to close gaps, the main gap is, in fact, the one between what people are willing to do and what is actually required to avert catastrophic climate change.
But it costs money and there is good reason for developing countries to be dissatisfied.
More developing countries are at the forefront of climate change than affluent, and together they have played a much smaller role in creating this crisis.
And the money already promised has not even run out in full.
More than 10 years ago, rich countries agreed to transfer $ 100 billion a year to developing countries to help their transformation into low-emission economies and adapt to the climate crisis. Adaptation can involve everything from building sea walls to prevent flooding, to moving communities back from the shore and retrofitting homes to withstand extreme weather events.
Anger at the American breweries
In addition to the money for adaptation, developing countries want new systems to pay for “loss and damage”, which basically means that rich countries are held financially responsible for the effects of the climate crisis. That is the idea behind the concept of climate compensation.
A senior U.S. official said one idea being considered is to fund the Santiago Network, a UN agency set up to provide technical assistance to countries seeking to rebuild from the effects of the climate crisis.
But the United States is otherwise closed to the idea of a new loss-and-damage fund, which is what many developing countries want. The European Union has said the same thing.
There is also growing anger against the United States. A representative of the Climate Vulnerable Forum – a group of about 50 nations – said on Thursday that the Biden administration was underperforming in terms of finances. He praised Nicola Sturgeon, the leader of Scotland, the only country that has committed any money to a loss and loss fund, with £ 2 million Scottish pounds ($ 2.7 million). It is a small but symbolic figure that shows that such a fund may be possible.
“The true leader who has appeared here at COP26 is not a party to the Convention. She is our host, she is the first Minister in Scotland,” Saleemul Huq, the forum’s expert advisory chairman, told reporters.
“Just before the COP started, she put a million pounds of Scottish money on the table for a new fund for loss and injury and challenged all the other leaders to match it. Yesterday she doubled the amount. So she is the true leader who is putting money “on the table for loss and damage. The United States gives us zero dollars. Europe gives us zero euros. But Scotland has given us two million.”
Behind him was a sign depicting Biden with the message “Has the United States kept its $ 100 billion promise? NO!”
‘You can not say no to everything’
“Developing countries are coming here with a few demands, and climate finance and losses and damage are the most important,” he told CNN. “If the United States wants to say no to everything, it will be a problem. And this will contribute to what China wants. The more there is a struggle between the developing countries and the developed countries, the more China can sit back and relax. “
Eickhout added: “You can not say no to everything. And if you want an audit mechanism to speed up the mitigation, then of course the question will be ‘OK, but are the finances evolving?’ And if you do not deliver losses and damage and you have not delivered your $ 100 billion, then what do we get in return? “
Supporting all of this is humans’ continued use of fossil fuels. Two sources familiar with the negotiations told CNN that Saudi Arabia, Russia, China and Australia were opposed to an article in the draft agreement calling for the phasing out of support for coal and fossil fuels.
Any reference to fossil fuels in the agreement would be a first and a breakthrough for the COP climate process.
Saudi Arabia is one of the world’s largest oil producers, Australia is a major coal producer and Russia is a major producer of coal, oil and gas. China is the world’s largest producer and consumer of coal.
None of these countries have responded to CNN’s request for comment.
It is also unlikely that China supports the language of fossil fuels, sources told CNN. Climate correspondent Xie Zhenhua was asked by reporters on Wednesday if he would support the section, but he did not respond directly, merely listing all of China’s plans for coal and finance.
Saudi Arabia’s energy minister, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman Al-Saud, said on Wednesday that the world should recognize “the diversity of climate solutions … without any bias towards or against any particular energy source.” Reuters reported that he was responding to allegations that his country was blocking the process as “lies and fabrications.”
CNN’s Ella Nilsen, Amy Cassidy and Ingrid Formanek contributed to this report.