Diplomacy
Will the rich countries keep their word this time?
The United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference (COP27), held in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, ended yesterday morning.
At the end of the summit, COP27 President and Egyptian Foreign Minister Samih Shukri, announced at the press conference that the coordination process has begun for the transfer of the presidency of next year’s COP28 to the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Shukri also announced that an agreement was reached at the conference to create a fund dedicated to the losses and damages caused by climate change in poor countries.
While poor and developing countries have been demanding this fund and a payment schedule for nearly 30 years, rich countries such as the United States and European Union (EU) members, which alone have the most responsibility for global and historical greenhouse gas emissions, have stood up to the agenda of creating funds and played for time.
The climate crisis is felt the most by the countries least to blame, so compensation is central to climate justice demands.
The fact that the countries and societies, which contributed the least to the greenhouse gases that warm the planet, suffered the most and were least equipped to cope with death and destruction was once again raised at this summit. One of the most important success criteria of the summit was the decisions expected to be taken in this regard.
The West is on at China
While the United States and EU countries are blocking the idea because they fear they may face huge payments and be held legally liable for historic greenhouse gas emissions, they also do not want the fund to go to states on the United Nations list of developing countries, such as China.
The EU then proposed to “set up a special fund for covering loss and damage in the most vulnerable countries, funded from a broad donor base.” Under this proposal, the loss and damage fund will be contributed not only by the wealthiest nations that have contributed the most to historic emissions, such as the United States and European countries, but also by emerging economies, such as China, whose emissions have risen in modern times.
However, in previous proposals, China was on the side of benefiting from the fund, not contributing to the fund. Beijing advocates the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility” in this regard. China has no liability for loss and damage, Beijing says, while arguing that they are already helping and are willing to help developing countries to increase their capacity to adapt through South-South Cooperation. Beijing denies the pressure of Western countries in this regard.
Therefore, this issue stands out as one of the important debates between China and the U.S. at climate summits.
Scope of the agreement remains unclear
Despite these debates, about 200 delegates in COP 27 reached agreement on the establishment of a loss and damage fund. However, there are serious questions about the scope of the agreement and whether it will be implemented.
Under the agreement, a transitional committee involving representatives of 24 different countries, will work over the next year to determine the form of the fund, which countries will contribute and where the money should go. The committee is expected to hold its first meeting before March 2023. The operational details of the fund will be determined at next year’s COP28 in Dubai. Apart from this general framework, many details remain unclear.
Officials have warned that the agreement on loss and damage is part of a broader agreement that is still under negotiation.
Rich countries, meanwhile, are demanding stronger commitments from developing countries to reduce emissions over the next decade to meet the climate targets of the Paris agreement, which calls on governments to limit global warming to well below 2°C and preferably 1.5°C.
According to the Global Times, formal talks between Beijing and Washington, and even face-to-face discussion, will take place after COP27 is concluded.
It may not be put into practice
Although poor countries are pleased that a decision on the fund has finally been taken, many are concerned about whether the decisions taken will translate into meaningful action. As a matter of fact, these concerns have a point. In 2009, developed countries committed to giving developing countries $100 billion annually by 2020 to help them reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. However, this commitment was not fulfilled and was constantly postponed.
Experts also point out that the details of how to implement the mechanism in line with the decision taken and how to quantify the damage caused by the climate crisis are not clear, stressing that this will make the mechanism difficult to operate and leave room for rich countries to maneuver.
It is unrealistic to expect the United States, historically the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, to lead efforts to provide climate finance for the developing world, which has blocked proposals for loss and damage to date. Considering that the U.S. budget for the fund should be approved by Congress, it may not even be possible for Washington to put money into the fund, let alone lead the way.
‘The empty promises of the West’
Criticizing the Western world for their indifference to the agenda of loss and damage, Scottish Prime Minister Nicola Sturgeon stressed that this is a fundamental question of climate justice and that the “rich world” has a responsibility here.
Despite the deteriorating effects of the climate crisis, the West, and especially the EU, has forsaken its responsibility with “empty promises and sweet nothings,” Sturgeon said.
From ‘phased out’ to ‘phased down’
On the other hand, after the COP26, when the ‘phase-out of coal’ was first mentioned, demands for the commitment to encompass all fossil fuels this year were not accepted. The demand for “phasing out of all fossil fuels” was not included in the final text.
Furthermore, the reference to “low-emission and renewable energy” in the text was interpreted as an element that could lead to the development of more sources of natural gas (as it produces less emissions than coal).
Following the sanctions against Russia, the European Union’s retreat from its goals due to the ongoing energy crisis has also attracted criticism within this context. Last year at COP26, discourses and commitments about “phasing out” coal were replaced by “phasing down” this year.
Parade of fossil fuel lobbyists
One of the most prominent criticisms of COP27 was the intense participation of fossil fuel lobbyists. Powerful fossil fuel companies swarmed the summit. 636 people linked to the oil and gas industry reportedly attended the summit.
The sponsorship of COP27 by Coca-Cola, which produces about 120 billion waste plastic bottles every year and uses fossil fuels in the process, was discussed widely on social media.
The administration of US President Donald Trump has resumed shipments of certain types of weapons to Ukraine after a one-week pause.
According to reports from Reuters and the Associated Press (AP), citing sources familiar with the matter, Kyiv has once again begun receiving 155mm artillery shells and high-precision Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) missiles.
The exact timing of the shipment resumption and the quantity of ammunition sent are unknown.
Previously, the US had frozen the transfer of 8,400 155mm artillery shells, 142 Hellfire missiles, 252 missiles for HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems, and 30 interceptor missiles for Patriot air defense systems.
Pentagon’s decision caught Trump by surprise
The Pentagon suspended military aid to Ukraine in early July. According to sources speaking to CNN, Trump had instructed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to conduct an audit of weapon stockpiles, and Hegseth, without informing the White House, halted all arms shipments to Ukraine during the audit.
Hegseth’s decision caught Trump by surprise. The White House announced that it had not issued an order to stop military aid to Kyiv.
Following a phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump promised to provide more weapons to Kyiv and instructed the Pentagon to consider sending an additional Patriot air defense system.
The US President stated, “They are being hit very hard, very hard. So we will look into this matter.”
As noted by The Wall Street Journal, if the US sends a new air defense system to Kyiv, it would be the first time Trump has approved a new shipment of heavy weaponry to Ukraine. Until now, Washington had only continued shipments approved during the tenure of former President Joe Biden.
US quadruples Patriot procurement
Meanwhile, according to Bloomberg, the US military plans to allocate more than $1.3 billion for the procurement of missiles for Patriot air defense systems in the new fiscal year starting October 1.
The report stated that the Pentagon has “quietly” quadrupled the total planned procurement volume of these air defense missiles.
According to the report, a group of senior military officials responsible for determining defense needs revised the procurement parameters in April, increasing the planned number of interceptor missiles from 3,376 to 13,773.
Bloomberg emphasized that this sharp increase in procurement volume highlights the US military’s growing reliance on PAC-3 MSE missiles in particular.
This situation also aligns with the efforts of the US and its allies to strengthen their air and missile defense systems.
For example, Ukraine relies heavily on Patriot batteries and the missiles supplied for these systems to repel intense Russian attacks on its cities.
According to budget records, the US had purchased 2,047 of these missiles by the start of the 2024 fiscal year. An additional 230 were acquired in 2024, and 214 in 2025.
For the year 2026, $945.9 million has been requested for the procurement of 224 new interceptor missiles. Of this amount, $549.6 million will come from the base budget, and $396.3 million will be covered under the “Atlantic Resolve” program, which aims to strengthen NATO’s defense in Europe.
Kremlin: Military aid will not end the war
The Kremlin has stated that the continuation of military aid to Ukraine will not contribute to ending the war.
Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said, “It will take time to definitively clarify which specific shipments, and in what quantities, will continue to arrive in Ukraine from the US.”
However, according to sources close to the Kremlin speaking to The New York Times, Russian President Vladimir Putin believes that Ukraine’s defense could collapse in the coming months and refuses to halt the conflict without significant concessions from Kyiv.
The news site Axios reported that during his phone call with Zelenskyy, Trump promised to urgently send ten interceptor missiles for Patriot systems to Kyiv.
Before this call, Trump had met with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Merz had called for the resumption of missile shipments and expressed readiness to purchase additional Patriot batteries from the US to transfer to Ukraine.
According to sources, although no concrete agreement was reached, the matter continues to be discussed.
In a statement to the press at the White House, Trump also confirmed his intention to increase arms shipments to Kyiv, stating, “They must be able to defend themselves. They are taking very heavy blows right now.”
The Pentagon also confirmed that, on Trump’s instructions, additional “defensive weapons” will be sent so that Ukraine can maintain its positions until a lasting peace is achieved.
According to customs and shipping records, an extraordinary flow of antimony—a metal used in batteries, chips, and flame retardants—began entering the US from Thailand and Mexico after China banned shipments to the US last year. Records obtained by Reuters indicate that at least one Chinese company is involved in this trade, revealing how US buyers of critical minerals are circumventing China’s export ban.
China dominates the supply of antimony, as well as gallium and germanium, which are crucial for telecommunications, semiconductors, and military technology. On December 3, Beijing banned the export of these minerals to the US following pressure from Washington on China’s chip sector.
Trade data suggests that US shipments are being rerouted through third countries, a situation that Chinese officials have acknowledged. This assessment was confirmed by executives from two US companies, who told Reuters they have sourced restricted minerals from China in recent months.
According to US customs data, the US imported 3,834 metric tons of antimony oxide from Thailand and Mexico between December and April. This volume is nearly greater than the total from the previous three years combined. Meanwhile, Chinese customs data shows that Thailand and Mexico have become top-three destinations for China’s antimony exports this year. Neither country ranked in the top 10 in 2023, the last full year before Beijing imposed the restrictions.
According to the consulting firm RFC Ambrian, there is only one antimony smelter across both Thailand and Mexico, with the Mexican facility having reopened in April. Neither country mines significant quantities of the metal. Despite higher prices, US imports of antimony, gallium, and germanium this year are on pace to meet or exceed pre-ban levels.
Ram Ben Tzion, co-founder and CEO of the digital shipment inspection platform Publican, stated that while there is clear evidence of transshipment, the trade data does not allow for the identification of the specific companies involved. “This is a pattern we’ve seen, and it’s consistent,” he told Reuters, adding that Chinese companies are “extremely creative in circumventing regulations.”
In May, China’s Ministry of Commerce stated that some unspecified foreign entities were “collaborating with domestic smugglers” to bypass export restrictions, declaring that halting such activities was essential for national security. The ministry did not respond to Reuters‘ questions regarding the shift in trade flows since December. The US Department of Commerce, Thailand’s Ministry of Commerce, and Mexico’s Ministry of Economy also did not respond to similar inquiries.
US law does not prohibit American buyers from purchasing antimony, gallium, or germanium of Chinese origin. Chinese firms are permitted to ship these minerals to countries other than the US if they possess the necessary licenses.
Levi Parker, CEO and founder of the US-based company Gallant Metals, told Reuters that he sources approximately 200 kg of gallium from China each month. He declined to identify the parties involved, citing potential repercussions. The process begins with purchasing agents in China who procure the materials from manufacturers. A shipping company then relabels the packages as iron, zinc, or art supplies and routes them through another Asian country.
Parker noted that these workarounds are neither perfect nor cheap. He explained that he would like to import 500 kg regularly, but larger shipments risk scrutiny, prompting Chinese logistics firms to be “very careful” due to the associated risks.
US-based BlackRock, the world’s largest investment company, has reportedly halted its efforts to find investors for a planned reconstruction fund for Ukraine.
According to a report by Bloomberg that cited sources familiar with the matter, the decision is driven by uncertainties surrounding US President Donald Trump’s position on Ukraine.
The fund was scheduled to be unveiled at a conference on Ukraine’s reconstruction on July 10-11, an event attended by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Sources indicated that the initiative was close to securing initial support from entities linked to the governments of Germany, Italy, and Poland.
However, with the possibility of Trump returning to the White House in January, BlackRock has decided to temporarily suspend its discussions with institutional investors, citing uncertainty about future support for Ukraine.
Alternative plan from France
Bloomberg has also learned that France is now developing an alternative plan, which includes creating a new fund to replace the initiative that BlackRock has suspended. The effectiveness of this new plan without US participation, however, remains a significant question.
A BlackRock representative stated that the company completed its pro bono advisory work for the Ukraine project in 2024 and currently has “no active commitments” to the Ukrainian government.
“The only discussions that influence BlackRock’s decisions are those the firm has with its clients,” the representative emphasized.
The fund’s $15 billion target
BlackRock Vice Chairman Philipp Hildebrand, who was previously involved in the negotiations, had announced plans to attract at least $500 million from governments, international development banks, and other public donors, along with approximately $2 billion from private investors.
According to Hildebrand, uniting investors under a single consortium would have enabled the direction of at least $15 billion in equity and debt investments toward Ukraine’s reconstruction.
The World Bank estimates that the total cost for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction exceeds €500 billion. Rebuilding the country’s port infrastructure alone is projected to require at least €1 billion.
The Triangular Nuclear Game and Dilemma Between Iran, Israel and the U.S.
Who is Thomas Barrack, Trump’s diplomatic point man in Ankara and Damascus?
ASEAN and China deepen ties amid threat of new US tariffs
US used pro-Israel Canary Mission website for deportation efforts, records show
US envoy reports deadlock in talks between Syria’s new government and the SDF
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoBRICS internal trade volume hits the $1 trillion mark
-
Europe2 weeks agoNew MI6 chief’s grandfather was a Nazi collaborator known as ‘The Butcher’
-
Asia2 weeks agoChina hosts SCO defense ministers on warship amid regional tensions
-
Europe2 weeks agoWeber warns against US dominance, urges European self-confidence
-
Middle East3 days agoIsrael details plan for ‘humanitarian zone’ in Rafah, called a ‘concentration camp’ by critics
-
America2 weeks agoUS intelligence officials claim Iran’s nuclear facilities were destroyed
-
Interview2 weeks agoWho won the Israel-Iran war? Retired Rear Admiral Alaettin Sevim speaks to Harici
-
Asia2 weeks agoChinese navy chief and top nuclear scientist expelled from legislature
