Thread by @n_thanki

Endgame time at #COP27 when all the dirty tricks come out. An omen: conference logistics have been extended through Sunday night. And the major expected deliverable, #LossAndDamageFinance, is going to blow the whole thing up… 🧵

cnbc.com/2022/11/04/cop…

The response from the global north has been to try and fob off the united global south demand for loss & damage finance, with some bullshit called the "Global Shield"

https://twitter.com/LossandDamage/status/1592588925138149378?s=20&t=Kb7_IKHMQdECULhvnwDBMQ

European countries are already (re)directing money into the Shield, preempting the call here at #COP27 for an actual fund for loss and damage

https://twitter.com/Josh_Gabbatiss/status/1592525525050077184?s=20&t=Kb7_IKHMQdECULhvnwDBMQ

But G77 came to #COP27 united on this point, and it was G77 unity which won previous victories like establishing the Warsaw Mechanism on loss & damage (2013), getting loss & damage into the Paris Agreement, and getting funding mechanism onto the agenda this year

They maintained this unity late into #COP27 with the G77 chair issuing reminders to the co-facilitators of the agenda item that all ministerial consultations should only be with the G77 as a whole and not its subgroups given the united position of G77

The effect of this unity was to pressure both the US and EU. The US also faced pressure from within, as a letter from liberal US Representatives urged

https://twitter.com/brandoncwu/status/1592926404202860544?s=20&t=Kb7_IKHMQdECULhvnwDBMQ

And the EU seemed to recognise early on that they were gonna have to give *something* on loss and damage finance in Sharm subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2022/1…

Why must G77 stand united? Because the game plan of rich countries is clear: split the developing world into the “most” vulnerable and the rest, & pit them against each other. Hence the pre #COP27 clamour for China, India to contribute to any fund
bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

Despite this being a completely unfair proposition given the hugely different historical responsibilities of even the larger developing countries as compared to Europe and North America vimeo.com/706111158?ref=…

The proposal came clear last night when Ghana took the floor for the "climate vulnerable forum" to applaud the Global Shield and call for loss & damage fund to offer support for the most vulnerable nations, with resources coming both from developed countries AND developing

That looks suspiciously like EU’s offer to establish a L&D response fund for most vulnerable parties at this COP with a "broad donor base" & "mosaic" including reform of MDBs and innovative sources of funding

This is the current draft text on the #LossAndDamageFund and as you can see it is not very good. At all. unfccc.int/sites/default/…

https://twitter.com/liane_boell/status/1593370371297796104?s=20&t=HwaKYkESkAz3RM42zIK7Kw

Really telling exchange in @gcdcj #COP27 press conf between @meganrowling and @mohadow, @meenaraman3 & @brandoncwu - Megan asks about limiting #LossAndDamageFund to "most vulnerable" and why speakers are cautioning against (1/2)

@mohadow says imagine you’re Pakistan, devastated by floods, and you go to access loss & damage $ and are told “sorry you’re a middle income country, not for you.” What would be the point of such a fund? This narrow definition of vulnerability is being forced on us by Europe.

@meenaraman3 reminds us that Article 4.8 of the Convention talks about “developing countries that are particularly vulnerable” whether they are an island, flood prone, mountainous etc. It doesn't say “only SIDS”. All developing countries are vulnerable.

Finally @brandoncwu also runs the facts: China and developing countries can give $ *voluntarily* - some developing countries have given to GCF. But the LEGAL + moral responsibility lies with EU, US etc - they have never acted on that responsibility #COP27