Brazilian diploma indicates that the fund for losses and damages should not be established at COP 27.

World Opera - In the final stretch of COP27 in Egypt, the delicate issue of creating a specific fund to compensate for the losses and damages already suffered by the most vulnerable countries due to climate change is heading towards a disappointing outcome for developing countries, which would benefit from the mechanism.

Ambassador Paulino Franco de Carvalho Neto, leading the group of diplomats defending Brazil's positions at the conference – and therefore representing the Bolsonaro government – ​​views with "optimism" the possibilities of the nations gathered at the conference taking the first steps to design this mechanism. However, the diplomat believes that concluding the issue will take another "two or three COPs". "This fund could eventually be created. I don't know if now," he said in an interview with [publication name]. RFI"I think it's difficult, to be very frank and objective."

The G77+China, a group of 130 developing and emerging economies of which Brazil is a member, presented a proposal similar to the existing Green Climate Fund. The mechanism would have a committee made up of developed and developing countries, which would evaluate the objectives and operating procedures of this fund starting at the next COP in Dubai (United Arab Emirates).

However, the United States, the largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases that cause global warming, rejects the creation of a specific instrument for damages – which they see as an open door for future lawsuits seeking greater financial reparations.

In the interview, the diplomat indicates that the government transition in Brasília is already taking place within the context of climate negotiations. At the event in Sharm el-Sheikh, the presence of the Minister of the Environment, head of the Brazilian delegation, was completely overshadowed by the arrival of the president-elect, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. In his speeches, the Workers' Party member warned that the "Lula who collects debts" from industrialized nations is back. 

"This is not simply a negotiation game. We are dealing with people's lives, people's survival, and the minimum conditions for existence that today depend, to a large extent, on us having a minimally better environment from an environmental point of view, satisfactory for all of us," argued Carvalho Neto.

Check out the main excerpts from the conversation, this Thursday (11/17):

RFI: Regarding this proposal to create an international fund for compensation for losses and damages, made by the G77+China, what is Brazil's view?  

The loss and damage fund is one aspect of what is called climate finance. The G77+China is very united on these issues, and we understand that loss and damage is an essential aspect of the climate finance equation. We obviously need financing to combat the increase in emissions (mitigation). We need financing for adaptation, that is, to address the negative consequences that have already occurred due to climate change, whether in agriculture, urban environments, in short, in economies, services, and the industrial sector as well. And we have the issue of loss and damage, which is very relevant and very important for countries, small island nations, island nations, and the African continent, but also for other developing countries, including Brazil.

As we know, we have already suffered intensely from the consequences of climate change. We recently had a very intense drought in Brazil, a drought not seen for decades. The rainfall patterns in Brazil have been altered. And all of this is generally a consequence of climate change, of the average increase in temperature. So it is natural that we want to meet these demands.

According to the text of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change itself, the responsibility to mitigate, reduce, and diminish these effects lies with the countries of long-established industrialization, that is, the developed countries. This is also stated in the Paris Agreement: the principle known as the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. Therefore, we understand that this is a fair demand made by these countries, including Brazil.

In what way did Brazil contribute to the formalization of this proposal?

It's always a complex, complicated, long, intense, and extensive negotiation, partly because everything depends on consensus. All countries have to reach an understanding for an agreement. It's not a matter of voting. And that, obviously, isn't simple, but it's the only feasible process from a multilateral point of view.

Brazil has always contributed, since 92, to the beginning of these negotiations surrounding climate change and sustainable development. We were, are, and always will be relevant actors in this process. Therefore, yes, we have made contributions.

There isn't really a finalized text, so to speak. There are proposals from different regional groups, and it will now be up to us, if necessary, to move beyond the technical level and elevate this discussion so that, at a higher political level, a decision can eventually be reached.

This also depends heavily, as is always the case, on the COP presidency – in this case, the Egyptian presidency, which has to lead this process with the support of the other countries. But we expect that we will find some ways, at least to meet these demands of... Postgraduate Course funding to address mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage caused by climate change.

What is the reaction from the United States – which has been, as always, a key factor in whether or not negotiations on this financial issue are progressing?  

Not only the United States, but the European Union as well. Postgraduate Course The countries that make up the European Union are resisting. And it's legitimate for that to happen. They are resisting paying more. But as I said before, it's a commitment made by all of us, including these countries, to provide the means of implementation, the resources to meet this challenge that we all face. Those who are better able should contribute more resources.

But from the conversations we've had with different delegations, I'm optimistic. I understand that we will reach at least some concrete results. Of course, the money won't appear out of nowhere, but it's a process that has to continue, that has to have a path looking forward. The concrete objective is that, in the end, the Paris Agreement can be implemented.

Ultimately, what is the goal of the Paris Agreement? To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, control the temperature, and ideally limit the increase in the planet's average global temperature to 1,5°C by the end of this century. And that is the great challenge we all face. There is a clear climate emergency, and therefore we must respond to it, otherwise we will create a planet where living will be very difficult.  

When you say you are optimistic that it will be possible to reach some understanding, we know that the most vulnerable countries are strongly insisting on the creation of a specific fund for loss and damage, starting at this COP27. When you say you have hope, is that the sense in which you mean it? 

This fund could eventually be created. I don't know if it will be now. I think it's difficult, to be very frank and objective. But what we can consider, as I said, is accelerating this process until, in the next two or three COPs, we effectively have a specific fund for those countries that need it most. It's not simple, but it's an obligation, perhaps also a moral one, that we all have, especially developed countries.  

On one side we have the United States leading the bloc of developed and wealthy countries, and on the other side, the less developed ones. And within these, we have a group: the most vulnerable and the most exposed. They are exerting pressure in this final stage, even mobilizing the press, stating that they will not sign anything unless there is a more detailed path regarding compensation for losses and damages. What force do you see in this pressure?

They have indeed been exerting pressure, and that's part of the game. That's natural, as are the counter-pressures from the countries involved. They are making their points of view clear. Now, the greatest pressure we see is moral pressure, which is real and true, it's legitimate and cannot be ignored.

This is not simply a game of negotiation. We are dealing with people's lives, people's survival, and the minimum conditions for existence that today depend, to a large extent, on us having a minimally better environment from an environmental point of view, one that is satisfactory for all of us.  

What other aspects would you highlight as important for Brazil to achieve, even if only within groups of countries, during this COP 27? What advances will be possible?  

The central themes are this climate finance, which also includes so-called crowdfunding, a quantified crowdfunding target that should replace the already famous and unfulfilled US$100 billion per year that developed countries committed to back in 2009 at the Copenhagen COP, and which should have come into effect in 2020.

What we know – and this comes from sources within the developed countries themselves – is that these objectives have not been achieved. So, the very first thing to do is to meet these objectives, even if not necessarily retroactively, in 22, 23 and 24, and from 25 onwards we should have established a new global quantitative target for climate finance, which should obviously be higher than those US$100 billion, due to an absolute need for climate finance and to face this challenge that we all have ahead of us.  

Listening to you speak, I'm reminded of much of what President-elect Lula has said in his speeches so far here at COP. His presence here is already being considered within the context of the negotiations as well, that is, within the diplomatic sphere – remembering that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs serves the Brazilian State?  

Without a doubt. We, diplomats and negotiators, represent Brazil, the Brazilian state, but also the government in power. We know what Brazil's general priorities are. And there's a tradition in Brazilian diplomacy dating back at least to 1992. We have our own concept of sustainable development, in which Brazil plays a reasonably important and relevant role in shaping this concept. It involves three pillars: the social, the economic, and the environmental.

So, we have to address these three elements together, and that's what we've always tried to do in our negotiations, obviously with the expectation of a new government leading the country. It's also in our interest that this aspect of creating and reinforcing the concepts of sustainable development can be carried forward by whoever is negotiating on behalf of Brazil in the future.  

In the context of the government transition, which is in full swing here at COP, is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs already participating in this transition here as well, in some way?

This transition process, which is mandated by law, has been occurring in various areas. We have all been following the news. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been providing the information it is responsible for, supplying information to the government that will assume its functions on January 1st. And we strive to do so in the most correct, professional, and institutional way possible. And that is our role.