The COP will provide them the opportunity to assess the status of climate actions and to evaluate the decade since the Paris Agreement was adopted — what has been achieved, and what remains to be done. Delegates will also analyse the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted by parties, as agreed under the Paris Agreement.
Experts and activists are preparing to promote their agenda, which in reality remains a donor-driven agenda, while claiming to represent the people. In the coming days and weeks, the world will witness nonstop commentary on the seriousness of climate change and the significance of COP in finding solutions.
However, history shows that the COP and UNFCCC have failed to live up to their promises. The Kyoto Protocol was the first legally binding agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions, but it failed because developed countries did not comply. The United States, the largest polluter at the time, refused to ratify it under pressure from the business community. After years of negotiations and a worsening climate crisis, the world finalised the Paris Agreement in 2015. It is a voluntary agreement under which signatories are expected to demonstrate intent to fight climate change. It is strange that when a binding agreement failed, the world decided to adopt a voluntary one. This indicates that the intent to address climate change diminished as the crisis worsened.
Despite 29 COPs and the associated hue and cry, the world has yet to find a solution to control rising temperatures. It is feared that with current practices, temperatures will exceed the 1.5-degree Celsius threshold and reach approximately 2.7-degree Celsius. This would be disastrous for the world. The core reason for failure is insufficient financing to fight the challenge.
Data shows that the world needs $7.4 trillion annually to combat climate change. However, the latest figures show that only $1.9 trillion was spent in 2023. The major push came from China ($980 billion) and the private sector, including household investment in solar and EVs, while public investments decreased.
The developed world is still not willing to fulfil its $100 billion commitment. Oxfam International, in its Climate Finance Shadow Report 2025, highlighted that developed countries are engaging in greenwashing. For example, they claimed to have exceeded the $100 billion mark in 2022. However, when Oxfam calculated the actual amount, it was between $28-35 billion — four times lower than the claims, and peanuts compared with the required amount. The Independent High-Level Expert Group on Climate Finance estimated that the needs of developing countries (excluding China) would be about $1 trillion by 2030 and $1.3 trillion by 2035.
Around 70% of climate financing is provided as loans. Developed countries are making money in the guise of climate finance. Developing countries received $62 billion in climate loans from bilateral, multilateral, and private sources, but will repay $88 billion. For every $5 borrowed, they will pay back $7. As a result, the debt burden of developing countries continues to grow. Developed countries have devised a new revenue strategy by positioning themselves as the world’s saviours. France, Japan, and Italy are leading efforts to exploit poorer nations under the pretext of climate finance. They are damaging developing economies and hindering development agendas, while contributing little to the fight against climate change.
This has created a dual challenge. Developing countries must repay loans while also facing the impacts of climate change. In 2022, Pakistan had to repay $20 billion in debt, while climate-induced floods cost the country $30 billion. Pakistan was hit by floods again in 2025, costing around $2.9 billion, and this year must repay $25.9 billion in debt. The international community promised to assist Pakistan, but instead of fulfilling commitments, some institutions saw an opportunity to impose additional loans.
Instead of honouring their previous commitments, developed countries made another promise. They say they will increase contributions to up to $300 billion by 2035, which is negligible compared to the need for $7 trillion annually. Developing countries, especially vulnerable ones like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and many African nations, are bearing a heavy price due to the inaction of global institutions and developed countries. The situation is worsening. It calls for serious actions, not more words. In this context, the world, especially developing countries, expects the UNFCCC to play a more active and meaningful role. It should deliver tangible results, such as financing or assistance from the Loss and Damage Fund.
Unfortunately, the UNFCCC is not aligning with the needs. Its performance remains extremely weak in pressuring developed countries to meet financial and emission-reduction goals beyond issuing statements. For example, the Loss and Damage Fund was created to support affected countries and communities, but the UNFCCC failed to mobilise adequate funding. The fund currently has only a few hundred million dollars to help the entire world. Developed countries see this as an opportunity to advance their dual agenda: shift the burden of action onto developing countries and promote the private sector as an alternative financing source.
THE WRITER IS A POLITICAL ECONOMIST AND VISITING RESEARCH FELLOW AT HEBEI UNIVERSITY, CHINA