TWN Bonn Climate News Update No. 9
30 June 2025
Published by Third World Network

---

Fractious climate talks set stage for COP 30 wrangles in Brazil

Penang, June 30 (S. Hui/Radhika Chatterjee) - Following fractious climate talks in Bonn, Germany, under the UNFCCC’s Subsidiary Bodies (SBs) that began on 16 June and ended 26 June, Parties agreed to undertake further negotiations in Belem, Brazil, setting the stage for major wrangles at COP 30 to be held in November this year. 

The closing plenaries were presided over by the Chair of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) Julia Gardiner (Australia) and the Chair of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) Adonia Ayebare (Uganda) and ran over time, ending around midnight of June 26.

The Chairs of the SBs had organized the closing plenary into two parts: the first part beginning afternoon of June 26, where closing statements from Parties and observers were heard (see highlights below), and the second part to adopt the conclusions of the work done in Bonn.

Following the closing statements in the evening, several negotiators were seen engaged in intense huddles outside the main plenary hall of the meeting venue, discussing ways to overcome a deadlock over the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), after they had wrapped up work on other agenda items during the day. At the heart of the deadlock was the guidance to be given to experts working on the indicators in relation to the means of implementation (MOI), specifically on finance. The deadlock was finally resolved after about four hours of consultations that were held at the level of heads of delegations (HoDs). Agreement was finally reached on a way to reference the MOI indicators including on finance in the conclusions, which then led to the quick resumption of the closing plenary to adopt all the conclusions reached on the various agenda items dealt with in Bonn.

Procedural conclusions were adopted on several key matters like the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP), the Mitigation Work Programme (MWP), and the ‘UAE dialogue on implementing the global stocktake (GST) outcomes, referred to in paragraph 97 of decision 1/CMA.5’ (UAE dialogue). In respect of these matters, Parties agreed to conduct further work at the 63^rd sessions of the SBs, which will take place in conjunction with COP 30. In this regard, the work conducted in Bonn were captured in informal-notes prepared by the respective co-facilitators of the informal consultations, which are in brackets, indicating a lack of consensus, whilst the divergent views of Parties were reflected as options in the various texts.  (Further articles will follow on the details of the key matters).

Some matters on which Parties could not advance further work on were subjected to Rule 16 of the UNFCCC’s draft Rules of Procedure, where consideration of these matters will be taken up afresh at SB63. These include the ‘Technology Implementation Programme’ (TIP), and ‘Review of the progress, effectiveness and performance of the Adaptation Committee.’    

The Bonn talks have clearly set the stage for the big clashes that will happen in Belem, and Parties in their closing statements expressed their respective concerns.

Highlights of closing plenary statements

Iraq, for the G77 and China, said it appreciated the progress made in agenda items related to the JTWP, transparency (framework), gender, agriculture, loss and damage and the GST, but also expressed concern “over the unfortunate lack of constructive engagement by some developed country Parties across several key agenda items, which risks undermining trust and progress.”

Iraq said that “the Convention is central to our work. It is the foundation on which we stand. It is the key towards having an enhanced multilateral climate change regime that is fair, balanced, equitable, and reflects our common goals and aspirations, our differentiated responsibilities, and our respective capabilities, consistent with science and responsive to the realities of climate change that is happening now in our countries. The principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC), in the light of different national circumstances, are central and should be upheld, as they are the basis for our collective ambition to combat climate change”.

It said further that “The Paris Agreement (PA) enhances the Convention which remains central to our work. In this sense, it is of great relevance to continue and strengthen the reporting by Annex I Parties (developed countries) of their implementation of their commitments under the Convention with respect to mitigation and the provision of support to non-Annex I developing countries.”

Elaborating further on the group’s priorities, it said, “Advancing the GGA remains a top priority. It must center on the real needs of developing countries and be consistent with achieving the temperature goals of the PA. Adaptation approaches, including the development of indicators for the GGA framework, must fully respect national contexts and capacities. Developing countries must be given adequate time, flexibility, and policy space to shape these indicators in a manner that reflects their realities and priorities.”

Iraq also highlighted that “MOI for developing countries is a key priority” and that a “balanced approach is needed that supports both mitigation ambition and development priorities, and not impose prescriptive pathways.” On just transitions, it reiterated that “nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are central to just transition pathways. Just transitions are pathways that are nationally defined, respect national sovereignty, and be  aligned with broader objectives of sustainable development and poverty eradication.”

It elaborated that “In a context when we are all doing efforts to increase our climate action, substantive discussions to take decisions on the implementation of Article 9.1 of the PA (on the provision of finance by developed countries) …is important to be continuing at COP30. It is an issue of serious concern the growing impact of unilateral economic coercive measures on the capacity and ability of developing countries to meet their obligations under the convention and the PA.” (These two items on Article 9.1 and unilateral measures saw an agenda fight on the first day of the climate talks).

Bolivia for the Like-minded Developing Countries (LMDC) expressed frustration on the slow progress in Bonn, saying that “we have faced a lot of resistance from our developed country partners in moving forward agenda items that would support actual implementation of the PA”. Explaining further, Bolivia said it has faced pushback from developed countries in advancing key issues such as: (a) the implementation of the TIP  and scaling up technology transfer for developing countries through the TIP;  (b) the proposal from developing countries to establish an institutional arrangement for Just Transitions; (c) the Adaptation Fund to start receiving the share of proceeds from the Article 6.4 mechanism (of the PA on cooperative approaches) and the need to reference MOI in the GGA (indicators); and (d) addressing the dis-enablers to climate action such as unilateral measures.”

Bolivia stressed further that developed countries also refused to discuss how their finance obligations under Article 9.1 (of the PA) can be implemented and “blocked proposals from the LMDC in (advancing) Article 6.8 (of the PA) on non-market approaches”. It added that “our partners prefer to talk about having more dialogues, obfuscating the real issues underlying their failure to fully comply with their long-standing commitments since 1994. There remains many, many unfulfilled promises…and as if to add insult to the injury, against our needs which run into trillions of dollars, developed countries chose to offer to mobilise only 300 billion USD for the NCQG (new collective quantified goal on finance).” 

“In spite of all these, the fact that we are gathered here around the table today is a testament to our commitment to multilateralism and international cooperation. It is 10 years of the PA, but it is 30+ years of the Convention. We have stayed the course. As developing countries, with huge development challenges, poverty eradication goals, and facing climate impacts, we are stressed and stretched,” said Bolivia.

“Fortunately, our partners in the developed world do not face such challenges. They have had many, many years to develop. Unfortunately, for us, this is not the case. But our partners do not appear to understand that we have different starting points. It is a highly unequal world. And yet we are slapped with unilateral coercive measures that further impact our development,” said Bolivia, pleading for the “need to inject good faith in this process”.

Bolivia reiterated that, “COP30 needs to inspire all of us to implement the PA, grounded squarely on the principles of the Convention, equity and CBDR-RC, while unlocking the provision of public finance through implementation of Article 9.1, [and] seriously addressing trade-restricted unilateral measures. The political position of developed countries attempting to change the PA to shift the responsibility of climate change on the shoulders of developing countries is not only unacceptable but also unethical.”

Venezuela, speaking for Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua, and itself (ALBA) highlighted the need to address the consequences of the imposition of unilateral coercive measures and also added that, “these are crimes against humanity and they affect many different sectors including trade, and we see direct and indirect impacts on our capacity to respond to the climate crises and …development….We have to think about the impact that these measures have on the lives of each and every one of us.”

Palau for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) reiterated that, “Acting upon the latest and best available science to keep 1.5 degrees Celsius in reach is a priority for AOSIS”.

Commenting on the ‘Research and Systematic Observation’ (RSO) agenda, Palau said, “We have heard crucial scientific updates…, including information on escalating risks, especially beyond 1.5 degree C. However, the alarming information shared in the research dialogue is not reflected anymore in the RSO conclusions that are still being discussed. Since the start of our Bonn session, AOSIS has expressed that we expected a substantive and meaningful conclusion of RSO….and we are alarmed that many compromises we already had to make simply to reflect scientific facts and that mere mentioning of 1.5 seems to be a red flag for others.

On adaptation, Palau said, “we are still trying to give the mandate and guidance to the experts to continue working past Bonn to provide a much smaller refined package of adaptation indicators…. As said, we do not have the capacity to undertake adaptation action without the required MOI.”  On loss and damage, Palau said that “AOSIS remains fully committed to securing a strong action-oriented outcome the WIM review (Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage) at COP30, which strengthens loss and damage landscape and delivers on the most vulnerable and sends a clear political signal that loss and damage is a pillar of climate action.”

On the JTWP, Palau emphasised that, “we can only be just if it's fair, equitable and inclusive. It must be one that prioritises the 1.5° C of the PA and it must be one that recognizes the most vulnerable….For AOSIS, there is no just transition without a phase out of fossil fuels. There is no just transition without renewable energy access. It is all our responsibility to ensure a safe, just and sustainable future for present and future generations.”

 Malawi, speaking for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), expressed its disappointment over the “slow progress on the important agenda items that are pertinent to them, including the MWP, Loss and Damage including the WIM, JTWP…”. It added that adaptation is an urgent priority and had “hoped for Bonn to set a clear path toward ambitious outcomes on the GGA and on NAPS (national adaptation plans) at COP30.” Malawi also said that LDCs can “show leadership to the whole world on NAPs and NDCs, but without MOI, these were made empty promises”. It reiterated that the “NCQG outcome in Baku failed us.” It wanted the COP 29 and COP 30 Presidencies to “fix what was broken in Baku by delivering a roadmap to USD 1.3 trillion that champions transparency, enforces accountability and put the most vulnerable at the center. We must triple adaptation finance in Belém across the board.”

Chile for the Independent Alliance of Latin America and Caribbean Countries (AILAC) said that, “We see a growing trend to weaken multilateralism and for short-term economic interests….we will continue to defend the PA as we've done in the past as the framework on the basis of which we must progress, also seeing that its potential hasn't been fully realised.” It reiterated that “to keep the 1.5 C alive, we need medium-term action and high-impact action which strengthens resilience and mobilizes financing at the level that we need.” On the ‘Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T Roadmap’, Chile said it hopes “the Presidencies can present a roadmap [which enable] us to identify, to improve financing and allow us to be more effective.”

Tanzania for the African Group expressed concerns over the slow progress in Bonn, adding  that “On loss and damage, the group notes with concern that the progress which has been made, lacks concrete timelines and we continue on relying on uncertain resources and the lack of quantified financial targets.” Commenting on enhanced transparency framework (ETF), Tanzania said that while there is progress in terms of the submission of first Biennial Transparency Reports, “we note that the success of the ETF depends on a sustained and adequate financial technical and the capacity building support which is still lacking”.

On NAPs, it said that “the effective implementation of NAPs is contingent upon predictable concrete and quantified financial support” and urged Parties “to ensure that we have meaningful decisions on this issue at Belém.”  On the Adaptation Fund, it reiterated the provision of adequate resources through the Article 9.1 of the PA. On agriculture, it said that financial support for agricultural adaptation remains vastly insufficient and for resources to be provided.

On JTWP, it said that “discussions must reflect the principles of the Convention, especially the CBDR-RC. For Africa, access to affordable energy for over 300 million people and the clean cooking for over 900 million people remains a priority in the Just Transitions discussions.”  It also had “concerns over the limited progress in enhancing the mandated functioning of the Climate Technology Center and Network (CTCN), strengthening the national designated entities and reinforcing the linkages between technology and financial mechanisms is critical and essential. We therefore urge acceleration of the TIP, in alignment with the NDCs, NAPs, Technology Needs Assessment (TNA) and Technology Action Plans (TAPs) outcomes.”

On the MWP, it noted with concern that “the erosion of the trust and transparency in this process is diminishing the participation of many African countries….(who) face high mitigation costs embedded in the NDCs with inadequate support for implementation.”  “High ambition in mitigation must be matched with high ambition in support, particularly for financial support,” stressed Tanzania further.

Uruguay speaking for Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay and itself (Group SUR), commented that the multilateral process has a very clear goal, i.e., to move towards the implementation of financing for climate change for developing countries and to strengthen JTWP. It hoped that we “will achieve a substantive outcome on the GGA, which will clearly guide the work of the experts and will adopt a fair resolution in Belém. We have to have indicators that will allow us to measure and close the financing gap for adaptation, amongst others.” On climate finance, it noted that on the NCQG, “the credibility of the system now depends on having effective contributions which are predictable and we also have to consider the needs of the most vulnerable countries”.

“There can be no real climate ambition without recognising the asymmetrical situation of our country's needs….we will always defend the principle of CBDR-RC and there must be fair climate action on the basis of the recognition of poverty eradication. In Latin America, we continue to be one of the most vulnerable countries and the most committed to climate goals, but we received little funding and we therefore continue to highlight this imbalance,” said Uruguay. On the MWP, Uruguay said that, “The digital platform can be a useful tool for developing countries. We reiterate that any mechanism must do so by respecting the principles of the Convention, avoiding undue pressure being placed on developing countries.” On the UAE dialogue, it commented that (the outcome in Bonn) “can be a starting point reflecting the different positions” and it looked forward to “focusing on the solutions” in Belém. “We need to step up our work in order to meet the 1.5 C goal. Multilateralism is not just an institutional framework; it is a political ambition in this world where we have inequality and pressing needs,” said Uruguay further.

Saudi Arabia for the Arab group reiterated “the importance of moving from negotiations to international cooperation, and abide by the UNFCCC and the PA, which must be based on transparency as well as the principle of CBDR-RC”. It said that, “as we look forward to COP 30, we believe we must focus on adaptation, mitigation, as well as evaluating the negative impacts of climate policies or response measures.”  It then highlighted the “importance of linking adaptation with the capacity and challenges to mitigate and adapt and to be able to face adverse impacts of climate change in relation to the temperature goals in accordance with Article 2 of the PA, while taking into account national circumstances”.

With regards to the UAE dialogue, it said that it is important to “take into account the positions of all Parties and the principles of UNFCCC without any selectivity”. It also urged the developed countries to abide by their financial commitments in accordance with Article 9.1 of the PA. It also reiterated that “just transitions must be comprehensive and nationally-determined, in line with CBDR-RC and through the proper channels, such as NDCs, without any pressure.” It also highlighted the need to reduce the social and economic impact of response measures and said that “this is a priority for developing countries”.

The European Union (EU) said that “the new NDCs will demonstrate the global level of ambition while the Biennial Transparency Reports (BTR) will reflect the global status of implementation” and called on “…the Brazilian COP 30 Presidency to lead all Parties towards a negotiated outcome, reflecting on progress, opportunity and inclusive growth emanating from the expected NDC and BTR synthesis reports.”

The EU said that it “is finalizing its new science-based 1.5 aligned NDC and will submit it in time to be reflected in the NDC synthesis report. The EU NDC, is informed by the upcoming proposal by the European Commission and to be agreed through the EU's internal processes, will reflect our determination to accelerate global progress in the achievement of PA goals. The EU NDC will show how the EU is already implementing the recommendations from the first global stock take and will continue to do so. We assure our partners that the EU will uphold and honor its climate finance commitments in line with the NCQG agreed in Baku.”

It also reiterated its expectation that the “the technical work on the GGA indicators must continue in a manner that preserves the delicate balance achieved in Baku”. It also expressed happiness “to witness progress on the Adaptation fund after so many years of deadlock.”  On the JTWP, it said “a just and equitable transition remains central to our discussions under the UNFCCC. We remain committed to engaging constructively with all partners on issues of concern in a spirit that is both respectful and solution oriented.”

On the UAE dialogue, the EU said it “see[s] the dialogue as the space to carry forward our collective commitments under the first GST in a transparent manner. We had hoped to conclude its modalities here in Bonn.” It also added that “despite difficulties, we made here a step forward towards a substantive decision on the MWP at COP 30” and “looked forward to discussions on the TIP in Brazil.”

Switzerland for Environmental Integrity Group (EIG) said that, “Belém will be judged by whether our collective NDCs are ambitious enough to uphold the 1.5 °C objective… We look to the incoming COP30 presidency to lead with urgency and to deliver a 1.5 C action package at COP30. We need to come together in Belém to provide the global response to the NDCs and show that we are serious about implementing our commitments.”

Switzerland also said that “Bonn should have been the moment to engage and instead we regret that discussions were derailed, diverting energy away from the substance that truly matters; how we halt deforestation, restore ecosystems and support communities on the frontline. On adaptation, we are pleased to leave Bonn with texts that gets us closer to deliver a framework with clear meaningful indicators to help us track progress towards the GGA.” It said that the NCQG “is the starting point of a new climate finance era”, adding that “some EIG members are already advancing domestic processes to unlock commitments. We encourage others to do the same. The roadmap towards the 1.3 trillion objective should aim to offer clarity and confidence to all. We also expect the Sharm-el sheikh dialogue [on Article 2.1(c)] (of the PA) to provide actionable recommendations on how to strengthen an enabling environment and align financial flows with climate goals in a manner that respects each country's decision making and pace of implementation.”  

On the JTWP, Switzerland said that, “we look to Belém to deliver a substantial decision and a toolbox on just transition that countries can use on the ground to really ground their 1.5 aligned NDCs in just transition. We're pleased that we can leave Bonn closer to this objective.”

Australia for Umbrella Group, reiterated its call “for all major economies to put forward ambitious, credible and economy-wide NDCs that are guided by the best available science in the GST and aligned with 1.5°C before the end of September.”

“With a global investment in the net zero transition growing exponentially, these NDCs are an unmatched opportunity to attract and stimulate investment, support for development and to avoid being left behind as the world changes. We ask the incoming COP30 Presidency to give political profile to the importance of ambitious NDCs, provide space in the negotiations at COP30 to reflect on our collective progress and to discuss practical opportunities to drive implementation, investment and cooperation,” said Australia.