The world had high expectations when 198 Parties which is composed of 197 countries plus the European Union—constituting a near universal membership—trooped to Dubai for the twenty-eight annual United Nation’s Conference of Parties (COP28) from November 30 to December 12, 2023.

World leaders, policymakers, environment activists and corporations were all focused on the Global Stocktake (GST), which is an assessment process designed to evaluate global progress towards achieving the climate goals established by the 2015 Paris Agreement of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius as the urgent way to stave off the worst effects of climate change. That goal was supposed to be concluded at COP28 in Dubai.

But what everybody got with the draft final statement of COP28 was a thud. The draft glaringly removed any call to phase out fossil fuels which is the main driver of the climate crisis. It instead used a watered-down language with the use of the permissive “could” rather than a mandatory “shall”, in an apparent concession to oil-producing nations that opposed the elimination of fossil fuels. The draft also failed to give timelines.

Reportedly, the secretary general of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which according to environmental activists is the most powerful oil cartel, Haitham Al Ghais, called on members and allies to proactively reject any language that targeted fossil fuels rather than emissions. The letter which, according to reports, he sent to his allies at the COP28 emphasized that it would be “unacceptable that politically motivated campaigns put our people’s prosperity and future at risk”.
Former US Vice President and climate activist Al Gore posted on X that “COP28 is now on the verge of complete failure. The World desperately needs to phase out fossil fuel as quickly as possible, but this obsequious draft reads as if OPEC dictated it word for word…it is deeply offensive to all who have taken this process seriously.”

The head of the global political strategy at Climate Action Network, Harjeet Singh, said the latest draft of the COP28 statement is “a significant regression from previous versions…this is a clear indication of the fossil industry’s lobbying power, influencing global policies to favor prolonged fossil fuel use.”

This Dubai environmental summit did not heed the directions of the Paris Agreement or the call of the United Nations Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, who was quoted as saying, “I have come back to COP28, because we are on the brink of climate disaster and this conference must mark a turning point. I am here to renew my urgent appeal to leaders: Recommit to the 1.5°C warming limit. End the fossil fuel age. Deliver climate justice.”

The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), an intergovernmental organization which is most affected by climate change, has already indicated their disagreement with the COP28 draft statement. According to Cedric Schuster, a Samoan chair of AOSIS, “We will not sign our death certificate…We cannot sign on to text that does not have strong commitments on phasing out fossil fuels.”

The desperation of well-meaning parties of COP28 was clearly conveyed by Bishop Gerry Alminaza, chair of the National Laudato Si’ Program of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, who said: “Thousands of us came to COP28 with the hope that it will deliver the climate action we all so desperately seek. Our young people and vulnerable communities bravely spoke up too. But the latest Global Stocktake is crushing that hope. Our global leaders have the moral duty to use the remaining hours of this climate conference to deliver action compatible with 1.5°C, and herald a full and equitable phaseout of all fossil fuels. Now is their chance to make courageous decision to pursue the global common good above their national interests. Our time is running out!”

Was COP28 really a cop out? Maybe nobody really saw the subtlety of choosing Al Jaber as President of COP28 despite his being the head of the UAE’s state-owned oil company. In a panel discussion last November, he was quoted to have said that there is no science behind the demand that phasing our fossil fuels is necessary to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius. That’s an antithesis of the Paris climate agreement.