At the end of June, the EU Foreign Affairs Council adopted a set of conclusions on EU climate diplomacy that left us with mixed feelings. Acknowledging and recalling that climate change is of paramount importance is commonplace – too often quoted and very seldom followed by decisive action. The explicit reference to the positive results of the Durban and Doha climate conferences is even a reason to get nervous. Many negotiators and observers will doubt a similarly enthusiastic framing for the most recent results.
And yet, the overall picture also leaves room for some expectation and evenhope that – at the European level – new energy will be generated to provide leadership for a comprehensive climate diplomacy needed at different levels. Following the ideas published in the Joint Reflection paper by the External Action Service in 2011, there are three storylines of climate diplomacy that are to shape the overall narrative of EU climate policy.
First, with the June Conclusions, Member States, the Commission and the High Representative reached a consensus that a more strategic approach is needed to ensure a comprehensive global agreement including all major emitters. To consider and accept complementary roles and competences for European players in building alliances for ambitious climate action in the run-up to 2015 can help to avoid a prolonged political stalemate. In the Reflection Paper, developed in parallel to the EU Council Conclusions, this is referred to as a "coalition of ambition” with third countries. With recent domestic efforts in some of the emerging economies like China, such coalitions are more realistic today then some years ago.
Second, to support low-emission and climate resilient development, the EU needs to strengthen its communication of the benefits – climate-related or general – that partnerships with the EU and its member countries can yield. To this end, however, a clear commitment to key climate policy instruments is needed to back any communication strategy. The vote by the European Parliament in early July to approve an emission trading reform process is an important step in this direction. By postponing the auction of 900 million allowances in the ETS, the EU sent a clear signal that it is still determined to address some of the shortcomings of its current low carbon approach – even if it remains to be seen if the reform package agreed will yield the intended results.
Third, the Council reaffirms its leadership in addressing the potential security dimensions of climate change. Apart from envisaging dialogue and cooperation with EU partners to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and switch to greener paths of energy production, it also recognizes the important role of climate change adaptation, which if designed and implemented in a conflict sensitive way, can form an important element in the EU climate diplomacy narrative. The task ahead is to outline how the climate diplomacy toolbox will be equipped. Instruments for resource, energy and water security need to prove their relevance for mainstreaming climate diplomacy into the priority agendas of EU member states and their partners.
More energy will be needed during the next months in Brussels and European capitals – not least to help explain the interests and priorities of the EU regarding an ambitious climate approach for 2015 and beyond.
To fight illegal coca plantations and conflict actors’ income sources, Colombia’s president wants to loosen the ban on aerial glyphosate spraying. However, considering the dynamics of organised crime, the use of toxic herbicides will not only fail to achieve its aim, it will have many adverse effects for the environment and human health, fundamentally undermining ways to reach peace in the country. International cooperation and national policy-makers need to account for this peace spoiler.
As India grapples with the worsening impacts of climate change, the need to strengthen its adaptation efforts has become more significant than ever. Climate diplomacy and mainstreaming climate adaptation into the most vulnerable sectors could provide some solutions to overcoming barriers, such as the lack of sustainable funding.
“Climate Security risks will materialise in very different ways and forms, whether we talk about Lake Chad or about the Arctic, Bangladesh and the Small Island Developing States,” said the EU’s Ambassador to the United Nations in New York, Joao Vale de Almeida, in his opening remarks. “But for the EU, there is no doubt, as underlined in 2016 in our Global Strategy, and reaffirmed by the 28 Ministers of Foreign Affairs, that climate change is a major threat to the security of the EU and to global peace and security more generally,” he said.
The challenges facing the international community are growing while the willingness to cooperate seems to be waning. Foreign policy must help bridge this gap. One way to accomplish this is by pushing forward a major achievement of multilateralism: the 2030 Agenda and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals. At a side event during the 2019 High-Level Political Forum, diplomats and policy experts discussed the role of foreign policy in the global sustainability architecture.