If China does take a more central role, it would mark a tectonic shift in the COP process. Historically, Western countries – particularly the US and EU – have provided the momentum, cheered on by smaller climate-vulnerable nations. The difference in the way the talks play out will be marked.
Jonathan Pershing, program director of environment at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, has been to every COP and understands better than most the behind-the-scenes bartering, bullying and brinkmanship that makes or breaks deals at summits. He says that China won’t lead from the front, like the US and Europe.
“They’re more cautious players than that. It may be that they’re leading with Chinese characteristics, which is what they might say themselves.”
(This echoes how Deng Xiaoping, president in the early 1980s, described his economic reforms, which catapulted the country’s economic growth into double figures: “socialism with Chinese characteristics”.)
Pershing suggests that China is likely to help drive the COP process forward by discreetly intervening to unblock disputes. Most of this effort will take place behind closed doors, he believes, but is likely to include urging developing and developed countries to increase their ambition – and the flow of cash.
However China may not be entirely helpful on some of the challenges that slow the process, such as instances when countries use COP as a stage to champion their own interests.
One of the biggest blockers in Baku was said to be Saudi Arabia, which heads up a group of fossil fuel producing countries that want to slow the transition to renewables. As a big consumer of fossil fuels, China has often thrown its weight behind them in the past, such as by resisting the UK’s effort to get agreement to phase out coal at COP26 in Glasgow.
Ultimately, though, there is cause for hope, according to some well-placed observers. Camilla Born, who has been part of the UK’s negotiating team and helped run COP26 in Glasgow, believes that the future talks will be determined by the new economics of energy, not the politics of meetings.
“This isn’t just about an idea of how to deal with climate change anymore,” she argues. “This is about investments, about money – it’s people’s jobs, it’s new technologies. The conversations are different.”
It is, after all, the biggest revolution in energy since the start of the industrial revolution. And regardless of which superpower takes the lead, or if the US is out of the game for four years, it’s unlikely that anyone will want to miss out on such a vast market.
