Cop28 has come and gone. It was hailed as historic and a failure at the same time. How can people disagree so much?

If you suffer from extreme weather, study the climate, or are an activist fighting against polluting industries, then you are deceived with the outcome. On the opposite end, if you are a fossil fuel producer or part of the agroindustrial complex, you have every reason to find the outcome satisfactory, even historical: you ensured your future profits.

From the onset, Cop28 was under scrutiny with the appointment of its president Sultan Al Jaber who, in his day job, is the CEO of ADNOC (the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company). The conflict of interest seemed too blatant. But many voices tried to reassure us—it needs an insider to bridge the gap. So, we waited to see what would happen.

The wait didn’t last long. During the first week, comments from Al Jaber surfaced and created a major backlash. Clarifications did not alleviate it. But there was a slight shift from previous times. The international outcry and scrutiny created a real pressure—Cop 28 could not fail.

Though not an oil producer like its neighbour Abu Dhabi, Dubai positions itself at the forefront of technology and innovation, even in the field of the environment. Bad publicity from a failed Cop would tarnish that image—not just for Dubai but the whole UAE. So Al Jaber’s mission was to save face. Gone were the days when denials were sufficient. A solution had to be found and quickly. And in the world of diplomacy, words play a very important role. Even hollow ones.

The value of fossil fuel companies comes from their reserves. This means billions and billions of dollars of revenues down the line. Why would they throw them away? Why would countries depending on these revenues hinder their economic growth, stop investing in development projects and also very importantly relinquish a powerful position on the world stage.

Another sign of the perceived pressure, and the power threat, was the attendance of a record number of representatives from the fossil fuel industry. They wanted to make sure that their voices were heard loud and clear. And they did.

In the end, no matter how watered down the declaration would be, it would still be hailed as historical. In the 21-page document of the “First global stocktake” , the term fossil fuel was mentioned twice:

• “Transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.” [Paragraph 28. d) page 5]

• “Phasing out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transitions, as soon as possible;” [Paragraph 28. h), page 5]

Even though fossil fuels were mentioned—some say 30 years too late—the terms are so open to interpretation and non-committal that they are just words. There is no enforcement. It’s up to the countries to decide. And we know what this means.

Then, there was another elephant in the room which was not talked about a lot: the agro-industry and in particular the meat and dairy sectors. The whole food system is second in terms of Green House Gas emission (about 30%). And like the fossil fuel industry, the number of lobbyists from that industry was in record numbers. And for the time being they were off the hook. And, like other contentious industries, they use the same playbook, the same tactics: deny, sow doubts, and buy time.

So what happens next? Nothing. Business as usual. Al Jaber, back in his day job, announced a record investment in ADNOC’s production of oil and gas. As long as it’s done “in a just, orderly and equitable manner” then it’s all good, and in line with Cop28 declaration.

Until there is a drastic change in the technologies available to provide energy efficiently in mass, no real phase out of fossil fuel will take place. Even then, the critical point will be how the power structure transforms and shifts to renewable energy. The countries behind the fossil fuel industry are doing everything to retain their power status. There is too much at stake for them.

To shift the lines, there will need to be a major political shift. In our democracies, as imperfect as they may be, we have the possibility to instil that change. Efforts and initiatives done at a local or personal level are good, but systemic change can only come from political change. In such an environment, the support of counter-powers become very important: civil societies and the free press are important levers in that fight. The smaller and less powerful actors can only leverage their good intentions and desire to make a change. Without larger coalitions, including powerful companies and funders supporting the alternatives, they won’t get sustainable results.

Besides the fight against the climate crisis, the big loser is the Cop itself. It is crucial that all parties involved meet and negotiate. But this should be done as equals. If money and influence keep on winning, then the one that suffers from the inaction of the polluters will have no respite and hope.

Cop29 will take place in Azerbaijan. Mukhtar Babayev, the appointed president-in-waiting worked for the oil industry for close to 30 years, though he is now the ecology and natural resources minister.

Sounds familiar?