U.S. Election Outcome Looms Over Global Climate Negotiations

Countries have a pivotal opportunity during this week’s U.N. meetings in New York to address significant disagreements regarding global climate finance. However, uncertainty surrounding the U.S. presidential election may hinder progress ahead of the upcoming U.N. climate summit in November.

“The elections are in the calculus,” noted Michai Robertson, a finance negotiator representing the Alliance of Small Island States. Negotiators expressed concern that many countries are hesitating to clarify their positions until the election outcome is known, given that the U.S. is the world’s largest economy and a major historical polluter.

Risk of Missing Financing Goals

Delaying discussions until after the November 5 elections could jeopardize the chance to establish a new deal before the current $100 billion climate finance pledge expires at the end of the year. Robertson emphasized that the uncertainty around the U.S. elections is influencing how nations are positioning themselves.

READ MORE: Floods In Gaza Intensify Hardships For Displaced Families

Governments are considering various scenarios, including potential wins for Vice President Kamala Harris, who has been instrumental in passing significant climate legislation, or former President Donald Trump, who has a track record of denying climate change and supporting fossil fuel expansion. A third scenario involves a prolonged uncertainty following the election.

Pressure to Set New Targets

The ongoing U.N. General Assembly marks the final major gathering before COP29, set to take place on November 11 in Baku, Azerbaijan—just days after the U.S. vote. Achieving consensus on new financial targets is proving challenging. A target that is too ambitious could result in countries failing to meet commitments, creating distrust among developing nations that rely on these funds. Conversely, a target that is too low would leave many vulnerable populations underserved as climate change accelerates.

U.N. climate agency chief Simon Stiell has indicated that annual financing needs could reach trillions to effectively assist poorer countries in transitioning to clean energy and adapting to a warming planet.

Future Negotiations at Stake

Failing to establish new financial targets before 2025 could undermine future climate negotiations, warned a senior official from Azerbaijan’s COP29 presidency, who is keen to avoid any semblance of failure.

Regardless of the U.S. election outcome, this year’s climate negotiators are aware of the limitations in pledges. A Harris presidency would likely provide continuity in U.S. climate policy, as she has voiced support for President Biden’s climate positions, including a previous pledge of $3 billion to the global Green Climate Fund. However, no new finance targets have been announced.

In contrast, Trump has indicated intentions to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and the broader U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, which would significantly impact global climate efforts.

Historical Context of U.S. Elections and Climate Talks

The convergence of U.S. elections and U.N. climate summits in November is not unprecedented. The contested 2000 election coincided with a climate summit that resulted in no agreement, delaying discussions until a special session in Bonn, Germany. Similarly, the aftermath of Trump’s election in 2016 shocked U.S. negotiators at the U.N. summit in Marrakesh, complicating their efforts.

This year, however, the urgency in the climate crisis is palpable, as extreme weather events continue to escalate. Negotiators are also better prepared for unexpected outcomes, as noted by Paul Bodnar from the Bezos Earth Fund, who previously served as a U.S. negotiator. “The difference between now and 2016 is that it was a big surprise in 2016,” he remarked, highlighting the importance of proactive strategies in global climate discussions.

ALSO READ: Israel Strikes Hezbollah In Lebanon, Death Toll Exceeds 350 People