s the curtains fell on COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the climate conference left a familiar stale taste of partial victories and glaring gaps. Concluded after 33 hours of overtime, and teetering on the brink of collapse before delivering a fragile agreement, the Baku negotiations highlighted a stark divide between the developed and developing nations — a divide that continues to shape global climate diplomacy.

A fragile consensus

The summit exposed the entrenched geopolitical imbalances and the struggles of developing nations like Pakistan, which remain disproportionately impacted by climate change yet are excluded from decision-making powerhouses. The headline achievement of COP29, the Baku Finance Goal, marked a modest increase in commitments for climate finance, with developed nations agreeing to mobilise $300 billion annually by 2035. This falls far short of the $1.3 trillion demanded by developing countries to effectively transition to low-carbon economies and adapt to the worsening impacts of climate change. Much of this funding relies on private investments and alternative sources like fossil fuel levies, raising fears of exacerbating debt traps for vulnerable nations. Romina Khurshid Alam, coordinator to the prime minister on climate change and environmental coordination, emphasised that the gap in the means of implementation remains unaddressed. She welcomed advancements in adaptation plans and Article 6 but urged parties to return to the negotiation table to ensure that vulnerable countries received their equitable share to tackle critical unresolved issues.

Simon Stiell, head of the UN climate body, underscored the importance of this milestone, stating, “While this agreement is far from perfect, it represents progress in a year fraught with geopolitical tensions.” COP29 president Mukhtar Babayev defended the outcome, calling it “the best possible deal we could reach” in a divided world. But Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, WWF’s Global Climate and Energy lead and president of the COP20, pointed out, “The world has been let down by this weak climate finance deal.” For many, the agreement is a concession forced upon them rather than a victory, highlighting the imbalances in power and priorities that define these negotiations.

Fighting in an unequal arena

The negotiations revealed a stark disparity in bargaining power. While the African Group of Negotiators called the final pledge “too little, too late,” they, along with other vulnerable nations, chose not to block the deal, fearing an outright failure would leave them with nothing. In the negotiating rooms, fiery speeches by developing nations painted a picture of frustration and determination. Many delegates emphasised that the deal’s reliance on private finance and loans is not climate justice but a perpetuation of inequality. The sentiment tilted towards the view that the scene was set to stage an escape by the Global North.

The power dynamic was unmistakable: the developed world dominated the negotiations, setting terms that left little room for equity or justice. Wealthy nations’ insistence on private sector reliance for funding, coupled with their calls for developing countries to contribute to the finance pool, painted a stark picture of misplaced priorities. These demands ignore a fundamental truth: the developing world, including nations like Pakistan, is already at the frontlines of climate catastrophes. The narrative of shared responsibility must shift to reflect historical accountability and current reality. How can countries grappling with rising debt and recovery from floods, droughts and other disasters be expected to shoulder financial burdens designed to address problems they did not create?

Pakistan, leading solutions

A nation contributing less than 1 percent to global emissions yet facing disproportionate climate impacts, Pakistan brought creative solutions and urgent appeals to the table. Outside the negotiating halls, the Pakistan Pavilion hosted numerous side events. It also participated at many other pavilions. Each delegate was on a quest to highlight a proactive approach to the climate crisis. From exploring pathways for equitable finance to discussing technological innovations, Pakistan showcased its readiness to lead on solutions, even as it struggles with limited resources and influence in the decision-making process. Speaking about Recharge Pakistan, a WWF project addressing water scarcity, flooding and ecosystem restoration, Romina Khurshid Alam remarked, “Recharge Pakistan exemplifies how nature-based solutions can enhance resilience and support vulnerable communities.”

Dr Adil Najam, the global president of the World Wide Fund for Nature, emphasised the need for science to guide judicial decision-making in addressing the climate crisis. He noted that failing to mitigate the crisis leads to the unavoidable need for adaptation, which brings forward a legal question: the distribution of responsibility. According to Dr Najam, the failure of adaptation is what he refers to as loss and damage, an issue that raises complex questions of governance and responsibility. He argued that courts will ultimately need to intervene to ensure that the right questions are posed and the answers are supported by scientific data.

At these side events discussions focused on clear de-carbonisation pathways, advanced technologies and scaling finance. It was striking how the most constructive conversations took place outside the main halls of negotiation, where real solutions seemed to be taking shape, offering ideas that were much more ambitious than the final agreements.

Pakistan’s experience at COP29 underscores a broader issue: the need for structural reform in global climate governance. The country’s contributions to the summit were rich in ideas and solutions, yet its influence in shaping key outcomes was limited. This imbalance is not unique to Pakistan; it reflects a systemic exclusion of vulnerable nations from substantive roles in negotiations. While platforms like COP aim to be inclusive, the real power lies with nations and blocs that wield financial and political influence. Without a concerted effort to democratise these spaces, the voices of those most affected by climate change will continue to be sidelined.

The fossil fuel contention

While finance dominated discussions, the critical issue of transitioning away from fossil fuels remained a contentious topic. Calls for ambitious national commitments ahead of the February NDC 3.0 deadline echoed throughout the summit. The Nationally Determined Contributions will define global ambition for limiting warming to 1.5 degree Celsius — a target that is increasingly slipping out of reach.

“The road to Belém [COP30] must be one of action,” urged Stiell. “This is the decade that decides our future. Nations, especially the G20, must deliver on their commitments.”

However, developed nations, heavily reliant on fossil fuel revenues, were reluctant to commit to concrete decarbonisation pathways. The absence of a consensus approach to phasing out fossil fuels remains a glaring gap in the global response to the climate crisis.

Baku’s legacy

As the summit wrapped up, the Azerbaijan presidency marketed the Baku Finance Goal as a diplomatic success, emphasising its provisions for the least developed countries and small island developing states. Babayev highlighted the transparency and accessibility of the agreement, calling it a “critical step towards delivering the 1.5 degree Celsius pathway.” Yet, for many, the agreement represents a missed opportunity to address systemic inequalities and deliver transformative change.

Azerbaijan, already a contentious COP host given its oil-based wealth, missed the chance to adopt eco-conscious practices in executing COP29. Industries like music touring, exemplified by Coldplay’s innovative solutions such as energy-generating dance floors, solar-powered venues and commitments to sustainable materials, illustrate how large-scale events can lead in climate-friendly practices. Such innovations highlight how COP29 could have embraced sustainability as more than just rhetoric.

The talks in Baku also underscored the growing urgency for genuine leadership and accountability. While developing nations made concessions, the persistent imbalance of geopolitics leaves them fighting for scraps rather than shaping the agenda.

The road ahead

As the world looks to COP30 in Belém, Brazil, the focus shifts to ensuring that all nations deliver on their promises. The urgency for transformative action cannot be overstated. The February NDC 3.0 deadline will be a litmus test for global ambition. Experts warn that without unprecedented action, the world risks crossing irreversible tipping points. For Pakistan and other developing nations, the way forward lies in amplifying their voices and continuing to push for equitable solutions. Initiatives like WWF-Pakistan’s Recharge Pakistan project demonstrate that developing nations are not just victims but leaders in resilience and innovation. These efforts must be matched by meaningful support from the global community. Focus must remain on advocating for fair finance mechanisms, ensuring transparency in fund allocation, and holding wealthy nations accountable for their commitments.

With each passing year, the gap between promises and tangible results grows wider. Now is the moment to act decisively as the consequences of further delay are no longer just theoretical. The world cannot afford another year of inaction. COP29 may have highlighted the gaps, but it also underlined the potential for collective action. The stakes have never been higher. The road from Baku to Belém is marked with difficult choices. There is also an opportunity for redemption. The question remains: will the global community rise to the occasion, or will the inequities laid bare in Baku persist?

Muhammad Fawad Hayat is the senior director for Recharge Pakistan at WWF-Pakistan

Amal Durrani is communications and advocacy manager for Recharge Pakistan at WWF-Pakistan