s COP29 kicked off in Baku this week, activists, think tanks and governments geared up to negotiate for a greener future. Amidst discussions being held and pledges and commitments being made by countries, some fundamental questions of implementation often remain unaddressed.

According to a report by the World Economic Forum, the ripple effects of geopolitical tensions have an impact on the environment through increased carbon emissions. Geopolitical tensions play a vital role when it comes to addressing issues related to climate change. “Russia’s draft budget for 2025 includes a record $135.5 billion for war-related expenses. This is more than the climate finance allocated by developed countries in 2022 (which was $115.9 billion),” says Anna Ackermann, a board member of the Centre for Environmental Initiatives, EcoAction. Anna also mentions how rising right-wing populism pushes governments to adopt fossil fuels-led initiatives with a justification of following their national interests rather than focusing on global cooperation. “It is not enough to make pledges at COP every year, we remain hopeful for the future but unless and until we change the ground realities, we won’t be able to change anything. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change obliges some states to report on their greenhouse gas emissions every year. But, because reporting military emissions is voluntary, many governments have chosen not to,” she adds.

While the Russia-Ukraine war is a globally discussed geopolitical conflict, other conflicts are exacerbating the impact of climate change as well. “There is a huge climate impact of conflict that we are not even discussing,” she adds. GHG emissions associated with armed conflict remain largely ignored and absent from UNFCCC data. We still have to work on making them transparent to gauge the impact of conflict on climate. As far as the humanitarian side of conflicts is concerned, a report by the International Committee of Red Cross titled Climate and Conflict says: “People enduring conflict are among the most vulnerable to the climate and environmental crises—and they are also among those most neglected by climate action, in part because of the challenges of working in such surroundings.”

Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage gained international attention during COP28 but securing funding for it remains an important issue during COP29 as there is a huge funding gap. Current pledges total around $702 million, yet a 2022 UN report estimated that the annual loss and damage needs could reach $300 billion by 2030.

“At the end of the day, a Conference of the Parties is a diplomacy and negotiation platform. When we come back to our countries, there is a lot we need to do to reach these goals and fulfill the promises. The Ukraine-Russia war last year had an impact on the whole world as we grappled with the energy crisis. Despite these conflicts and historical rivalries, we remain hopeful that we will be able to collaborate with think tanks of countries like India this time to work towards a better future,” says Zainab Naeem, who is part of the Sustainable Development Policy Institute delegation attending the COP this year.

In South Asia, there is a rising need for diplomacy to tackle issues like smog that require countries like India and Pakistan to go beyond their political conflicts. This year, Lahore and Delhi became the most polluted cities in the world. “Issues like smog need a transboundary solution. We need to discuss these issues with India to come up with better solutions. Platforms like the COP need to be explored to open new pathways,” says Naeem.

Regarding smog in India and Pakistan, Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, in an interview last week, said: “Smog is not just a political issue; it is also a humanitarian issue. The winds are not contained by an international border.” In a recent interview at CBD COP16 in Columbia, Indian Minister Kriti Vardhan Singh expressed a willingness to work with Pakistan on the issue of smog and reviving the SAARC. Be that as it may, at the end of the day, these comments amount to mere political statements unless a practical plan is put in place.

The reactive nature of most climate policies is another aspect of the issue. Most global and national climate change policies and frameworks are reactive to incidents as authorities are often unable to foresee issues related to climate change.

The Malé Declaration on Control and Prevention of Air Pollution and Its Likely Transboundary Effects for South Asia, was signed in 1998 by members of the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme in Malé, Maldives. However, there has been no progress in that direction recently. Platforms like the SAARC and pacts like the Malé Declaration do exist but due to political differences and historical rivalries, governments fail to come together to address issues that need prompt intervention.

Dawar Hameed Butt, co-director of the Pakistan Air Quality Initiative, a climate research and advocacy group, told Al Jazeera last month: “The Malé Declaration among South Asian countries aimed to develop a transboundary pollution management approach but was unsuccessful. Efforts to revive it are under way but the specifics remain uncertain.”

For the COP to drive change, experts say, it must encourage countries with complex relationships to find common ground in climate diplomacy. It should also offer mechanisms and platforms that facilitate trust-building around shared environmental goals.

The writer is a freelance journalist in Lahore working primarily on climate change