Can a COP Held in Oil Countries Stay Relevant?

Oil and gas? “They are indeed a gift of God.” That quote is perhaps unsurprising given its source: Haitham Al Ghais, a Kuwaiti oil executive and secretary general of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). But Al Ghais called oil and gas divine gifts while giving a speech on a startling stage: COP29, the United Nations’ international meeting focusing on climate.

COP (Conference of the Parties) held its annual event this November in Azerbaijan. The president of the host country, Ilham Aliyev, used his opening speech to praise fossil fuels, also calling them “gifts of God” and characterizing the backlash against his oil-producing nation a “well-orchestrated campaign of slander and blackmail.”

“If speeches and slogans could save the climate, COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, would already be a success.”

Aliyev’s speech supporting fossil fuels was quickly followed by António Guterres, UN secretary-general. Guterres said that insisting on fossil fuels as climate change ravages the globe was “an absurd strategy,” according to Reuters, which wrote that such “opposing views underscored the challenge at the heart of the climate negotiations: while nations are urged to shift to green energy sources, many, including wealthy Western nations, continue to rely on fossil fuels.”

And COP, the world’s largest, most expensive, and most prominent climate conference, continues to be held in countries that run on oil production. It was in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, in 2023 and will be in Brazil in 2025—both countries that are members of OPEC.

What message is it sending to the world to fly climate delegates to wealthy, fossil-fuel-forward countries? In the face of such contradictions, can COP continue to stay relevant?

COP Criticism

You can…bathe in crude oil as a tourist activity in the host city of Baku.

Criticism of COP has grown over the years for myriad reasons. For one, attendees must usually fly in to attend the conference—and a shockingly large number of speakers and participants take private jets to do so.

Private air travel is a growing contributor to emissions, partly because the flights are often so short. In 2023, the number of private flights increased to more than four million, and those jets produced more than 15.6 million tons of carbon dioxide, according to Nature.

The previous year, at least 100 private jets landed in the two airports serving the 2022 COP conference during the days leading up to the meeting, held in Egypt. Environmental activists physically blocked private jets attempting to take off the day before the 2024 conference in Amsterdam.

Other criticisms of COP include the hefty price of admission; the lack of concrete action—as Undark noted, “If speeches and slogans could save the climate, COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, would already be a success”—the marginalization of smaller countries; and the exclusion of impacted people, including women and Indigenous communities.

This brand of gatekeeping is seen in other climate conferences, including Climate Week NYC. As NPQ reported about that conference, “The exclusion of these voices leads to discussions that feel theoretical rather than grounded in real-world challenges.”

The Disconnect of Wealthy, Oil-Producing Nations

When it comes to COP, the decision to repeatedly host in cities and countries running on—and in many cases, built on—predominately fossil fuel economies has made the conference, in the words of the Wall Street Journal, “seriously strange.”

You can, for example, bathe in crude oil as a tourist activity in the host city of Baku, to take advantage of the substance’s alleged health benefits. The Wall Street Journal described Azerbaijan’s economy as “one of the most dependent on oil and gas, which make up nearly 60 percent of its income.”

A climate conference with a goal of decreasing reliance on fossil fuels whose most recent host countries plan to increase fossil fuel production by 32 percent over the next decade? That is becoming difficult to swallow for many who care about climate justice.

CNN characterized this November’s conference as a “chaotic, bitter summit.” Meanwhile, Inside Climate News described it as coming “close to collapse.” And COP29’s final outcome that wealthy countries more responsible for the climate change impacts facing poorer countries must pay those nations $300 billion annually by 2035 was heavily contested.

Representatives from poorer countries say it is not nearly enough, falling well below the $1.3 trillion expected to be needed. Harjeet Singh of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative described this outcome to CNN as “dismal,” saying it’s “raised serious concerns about the integrity of the global climate negotiation process.”

Turning Inward

Some government leaders refused to attend COP29 in advance, a decision shared by leaders of nonprofits and grassroots organizations, as well as climate activists. As the founder of the Institute for Small Islands, Caroline Mair-Toby, wrote in her decision to opt out: “It is difficult, in all good conscience, to engage with a global political process that continues to overlook the urgent needs of the world’s most vulnerable communities.”

A group including former UN leaders and top climate scientists published an open letter arguing, among other reforms, that countries that do not support the transition away from fossil fuels should not hold the COP presidency. That disconnect was glaring throughout the conference, which, as climate researchers Alice C. Hill and Priyanka Mahat wrote in a brief for the Council on Foreign Relations, “laid bare the lack of ambition for aggressive climate action.”

Climate despair is already huge, as are the hurdles in the fight for climate justice. That the world’s most prominent climate conference felt like a display of greenwashing at times is only heightening the apathy and helplessness some already feel about the crisis.

For leaders like Mair-Toby, while the lack of global action is disappointing, hope may be found in acting locally. “While COP29 represents yet another missed opportunity for real change, my focus is now shifting to more localized, community-driven efforts,” she wrote.

That statement was echoed by Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London. As Otto told CNN, “By lamenting on the broken process, we just add to the stalling and delay. We need to save the institutions we have.”