logo
We bear the brunt of the climate crisis. A Pacific Cop could help shape the global response

We bear the brunt of the climate crisis. A Pacific Cop could help shape the global response

The Guardian22-05-2025

Watching from the western Pacific, we saw many describe Australia's recent election as a decisive moment for climate and energy policy. If that was the case, the people of Australia have spoken loud and clear.
Like many of us in the Pacific had hoped, most Australians wanted to throw off the shackles of the last decade's 'climate wars' and usher in a new era of responsible climate and energy policy, one that harnesses the limitless potential of Australia's renewable energy superpowers and helps lead the Pacific region and the world to a safer and more prosperous climate future.
By hosting next year's Cop31 climate conference together with the Pacific, Australia would have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to both catalyse its own clean transition to a decarbonised economy, and to elevate its relationship with the Pacific to the top tier of its foreign and strategic policy priorities. If well-delivered over the coming two years, these twin objectives might ultimately be viewed as the hallmarks of a nation that successfully left the climate culture wars for dead and cemented a legacy of new climate leadership for, and in solidarity with, its Pacific neighbours.
As I said at last year's Cop29 in Baku, now is the time for those standing in the way of a high ambition Pacific Cop to move aside. That the Pacific has never physically hosted a COP – despite bearing the full brunt of the climate crisis – must be corrected. In this defining decade, a Pacific Cop would ensure that those most affected can help shape the global response.
Cop31 would also be an opportunity to shine a light on Australia's efforts to accelerate the transition of its historically carbon-intensive economy and to demonstrate the multiple benefits that can flow from renewables and new green industries. This would have a particularly important demonstration effect for the booming economies of the Asia-Pacific, whose development pathways must be decarbonised if we are to avoid a significant overshooting of the goals of the Paris agreement.
But ultimately, the merit and credibility of a bid from Australia with the Pacific will rest upon two factors.
First, the level of ambition demonstrated by Australia in the formulation of its 2035 emissions reduction target under the Paris agreement. As the climate treaty says, each country's target should reflect its 'highest possible ambition'. In other words, it should be a 'stretch goal' that is challenging to achieve, but ultimately within reach. I saw an analysis during my recent visit to Sydney that a 1.5C-aligned contribution from Australia would require at least a high-70s% reduction in GHG emissions below 2005 levels by 2035.
Australia should also make moves to address the climate impact of its fossil fuel production and exports – it remains one of the top three fossil fuel exporters in the world. As I said in Sydney, we urge the Australian government to shift away from new coal and gas developments, in line with global momentum and the expectations of Pacific partners. Without such a signal, questions may continue to linger over the credibility of Australia's potential leadership role in the UN process.
The second factor will be the collaborative spirit embedded in the Australian-Pacific partnership on Cop31. For example, there should be early moves to appoint Pacific co-leads for key positions in the Cop31 process, such as the formal presidency role as well as 'climate champions' who seek to drive new climate commitments from the private sector, regions, cities and local governments. But perhaps more importantly, a landmark Pacific Cop must be convened at the very highest level, bringing in world leaders on Australia's Pacific coast to ensure that climate remains at the top of the global agenda.
More substantively, my Pacific colleagues see great value in pursuing a signature new initiative to make the Pacific the first region in the world to become 100%-powered by renewables, both on our islands and through local use of electrified vessels. To shape this initiative, I will host Pacific leaders here in Palau in August 2026, and we can work towards a pre-Cop31 gathering elsewhere in the region to channel international resources towards this win-win-win outcome.
The primary aim would be to accelerate the Pacific switch from reliance on expensive imported diesel and other fossil fuels to much cheaper renewable power generation and storage. As one example, we look forward to further support from the Australian Infrastructure Finance Facility for the Pacific to rapidly complete work on Palau's first utility-scale solar project in Ngatpang with the planned addition of a battery energy storage system (BESS).
To do this at scale across the Pacific will require new flows of climate finance and an associated derisking mechanism to help unlock private sector investment. Either way, Australian leadership will be key to demonstrate how Cop31 can tangibly deliver for the region.
The Albanese government now has a crystal clear mandate to make real progress on an intergenerational issue of paramount importance – at home, in the region and on the world stage. It is an opportunity that Australia must now grab with both hands, together with its Pacific family.
Surangel Whipps Jr is the president of Palau

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Western Sydney voices outrage over Trump's Iran strike: What residents REALLY think as tensions rise in the Middle East
Western Sydney voices outrage over Trump's Iran strike: What residents REALLY think as tensions rise in the Middle East

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Western Sydney voices outrage over Trump's Iran strike: What residents REALLY think as tensions rise in the Middle East

The escalating conflict between Iran and US-backed Israel has members of Sydney 's Middle Eastern diaspora both worried about the impact on people in the region and angry at the leaders who are risking a devastating war. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called for calm on Monday, urging Iran not to retaliate against airstrikes by the US and Israel against its nuclear facilities, but the Islamic Republic did fire missiles at US military bases in the region. On Tuesday US President Donald Trump announced there would be a ceasefire between the Iran and Israel, which is set to begin at 2PM AEST. Though the conflict is taking place thousands of kilometres away, its impact is deeply felt in Australia, particularly among Middle Eastern and Muslim communities. Many fear for their families and loved ones overseas. 'We are very worried, it's a very dangerous situation,' said Leena, a woman of Egyptian background, speaking on Haldon Street in Lakemba, a predominantly Muslim hub in Sydney's southwest. 'Iran is so erratic, you don't know what they're going to do next.' Leena was critical of those who led the attacks on Iran, calling U.S. President Donald Trump and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 'war criminals.' 'They should both have their heads against a wall and shot,' she said. Local resident Moni also expressed alarm at the US's growing involvement, seeing parallels to the bombing that led to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. She questioned the legitimacy of Israel and America preventing Iran from producing nuclear weapons, given both those countries have huge stockpiles of such arms. 'It's not about the nuclear weapons... they want to rule, they want to take from everyone,' she said. Moni cautioned the Australian government not to follow the United States into the conflict. '[Australia] is a country of peace. Why would we want to be dragged in?' She also voiced doubts that the Trump administration paid any attention to the interests of Australia. Albanese's planned face-to-face meeting with Donald Trump at last week's G7 summit was cancelled when Trump left early amid the worsening crisis. The two leaders are still yet to meet in person, seven months on from Trump's election win, and despite major issues of concern such as the imposition of US trade tariffs on Australian goods, and a formal review about whether to go ahead with the AUKUS submarine deal. A plan for Albanese to attend the NATO meeting in an effort to secure a meeting with Trump was floated, but it has since been dashed. 'This war is not about helping anyone, it's not about looking after people, the war is not about saving you or me,' Moni said. 'This war is just horrible.' Another resident, Sam, who has friends and family in both Lebanon and Iran, shared his anxiety about the growing instability in the region. 'A lot of people have family overseas. My sister-in-law is going to Lebanon, and now she's not sure if she should go,' he said. 'Is it going to escalate to that stage where they close the airports, and you get locked in and can't come back? We've had that issue before.' He condemned the rising civilian death toll in the regionand said it had become too distressing for him to even follow the news. 'More innocent people are dying in the crossfire. It's not right. How long are they going to keep going with this?' 'When I see innocent kids, I can't look. I have kids of my own.' Molly, a local resident and mother, is not from a Middle Eastern background but was in solidarity with the surrounding community. She expressed longstanding support for Palestine and said the recent escalation had left her feeling anxious for the people around her. 'I love this community. We share the same values,' she said. 'I care for my neighbours and their families overseas. It is horrible to see what is happening.' The human toll is mounting. According to Iranian health authorities, more than 400 Iranians have been killed since the conflict began. Israel has reported at least 25 deaths in the same period from Iranian missiles, and with both sides continuing to launch retaliatory strikes, the death toll is expected to rise. NBC has reported that Iran had warned Trump they would activate sleeper cells within the US to launch retaliatory terror attacks if its nuclear sites were targeted. In response to the reports, Prime Minister Albanese reiterated his call for de-escalation. 'We're opposed to any action against Australians, or indeed against anyone else,' he said. 'What we want to see, as President Trump has said, is peace going forward. There's an opportunity for that to occur.' He added that Australia's terror threat level had not changed as a result of the conflict. 'The ASIO Director-General and our security intelligence agencies are constantly engaged in monitoring,' he said. 'There's been no change in any of the advice that has been issued.' Local resident Apurba echoed the calls for peace, saying further escalation would only worsen the humanitarian crisis. 'We should absolutely be against the war,' he said. He added that human rights across the region remained a major concern. More than 4000 Australians in Israel and Iran have registered with DFAT should they need assistance getting out of an expanded warzone. The Australian government's Smartraveller website has updated its travel advice for Australians overseas, with several Middle Eastern countries now listed under heightened alert levels. Multiple destinations including Iran, Israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and Iraq, have been marked as 'do not travel' or 'exercise a high degree of caution', reflecting growing concerns over regional instability. 'We continue to advise Australians do not travel to (these countries) due to the volatile security situation and the risk it could deteriorate with little notice.' The conflict between Israel and Iran erupted a week ago, when Israel launched an attack against the Islamic republic's missile capabilities, claiming it was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons. Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 639 people and wounded 1300 others, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group. Israel says Iran's retaliatory strikes have killed at least 24 and wounded hundreds more.

Climate change is solved! Clover Moore has fixed it - never mind China's fleet of ONE THOUSAND coal-fired power plants! PETER VAN ONSELEN on absurd local council move
Climate change is solved! Clover Moore has fixed it - never mind China's fleet of ONE THOUSAND coal-fired power plants! PETER VAN ONSELEN on absurd local council move

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Climate change is solved! Clover Moore has fixed it - never mind China's fleet of ONE THOUSAND coal-fired power plants! PETER VAN ONSELEN on absurd local council move

Clover Moore's decision to ban gas appliances in all new buildings from 2026 is yet another example of local government mistaking symbolism for substance. It won't meaningfully reduce emissions; it might even increase them if the energy grid needs to rely on coal-fired power to keep up with rising electricity demand. It certainly won't deliver the promised cost savings, and it won't wean the city off fossil fuels either. Gas bottles for BBQs will still be allowed, I assume? The inconsistencies are rife, especially when you consider that the NSW Premier has already ruled out a statewide rollout of Moore's idea. What it will do is generate virtue-signalling headlines allowing councillors to claim they're doing something - despite solving very little. It's just theatre. And that's before you even consider the consequences for development approvals, which will become even more complicated under Moore's plan. It could potentially restrict the number and scale of new builds that are necessary to help address the national housing crisis that serious politicians are trying to solve. Let's start with the economics of this lunacy. The claim that households will save $626 a year is based on optimistic assumptions about future electricity prices and appliance performance. It ignores the fact that the grid isn't reliably equipped to handle mass electrification, especially during peak demand. There's also the inconvenient truth that many people prefer cooking with gas. But personal choice and practical realities take a back seat to ideological grandstanding. The idea that gas stoves are the new cigarettes is laughable. If gas appliances were genuinely hazardous at the scale being implied, we'd expect to see consistent health warnings from national regulators, not inner-city councils freelancing on public health. This kind of hyperbole only damages the credibility of the broader climate change movement. Then you have to consider the global picture. While Moore's council congratulates itself for banning stovetops, China, as the world's largest emitter, is building new coal-fired power stations at a record pace alongside efforts to transition to renewables. It is building solar farms the size of cities - but also rolling out nuclear plants and expanding coal capacity to stabilise the grid. Why? Because that's what it takes to decarbonise without blackouts or economic shock. Sydney's ban won't meaningfully shift Australia's own emissions trajectory, much less the world's. Certainly not while the national grid still leans so heavily on coal. This kind of misplaced activism diverts attention from real policy levers like grid upgrades, national emissions standards and large-scale energy storage. The planet doesn't need more stunts - it needs serious, scalable solutions, and Moore's 'idea' isn't one of them.

Aukus vital to ‘deter Chinese aggression', say US lawmakers, as Trump urged to recommit to submarine deal
Aukus vital to ‘deter Chinese aggression', say US lawmakers, as Trump urged to recommit to submarine deal

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

Aukus vital to ‘deter Chinese aggression', say US lawmakers, as Trump urged to recommit to submarine deal

The Aukus pact is vital to 'deter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific region', Republican and Democrat lawmakers in the US have told the Pentagon, urging the US to recommit to the nuclear submarine deal with Australia and the UK. The Trump administration announced this month it would undertake a 30-day review of the Aukus agreement – the deal struck in 2021 that would see US nuclear submarines sold to Australia, and new-design nuclear-powered Aukus submarines built in the UK and Australia. A letter addressed to defence secretary Pete Hegseth, signed by five Republican and Democrat lawmakers, urged the Pentagon to back Aukus, despite growing concerns over laggard shipbuilding in both the US and UK. 'As the department of defense begins its 30-day review of the trilateral Aukus mission, we write to you to express our strongest support for the agreement. 'This is a defense alliance that is overwhelmingly in the best interest of all three Aukus nations, as well as the entire Indo-Pacific region. Indeed, as you noted in February when Australia provided the U.S. with a $500m Aukus payment, 'this is not a mission … America can undertake by itself. It has to be [done by] robust allies and partners. Technology sharing and subs are a huge part of it.' The letter said the breadth and depth of support for Aukus within the US Congress had grown dramatically and 'we have worked quickly to recognize Aukus's mission to deter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific region'. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email It also pointed to progress made, saying 'legislation necessary for Aukus to proceed had passed Congress; shipbuilding rates in the US had lifted substantially; and Australian naval officers had begun joint training on US nuclear-powered submarines.' Australia's defence minister, Richard Marles, who is in London on his way to the Nato meeting at The Hague, said he was 'not going to speculate about what the review will ultimately say' but stressed a review of a major defence project was a 'perfectly natural step' for an incoming administration to take, one that was supported by Australia. Asked about workforce challenges faced by both the US and UK shipbuilding industries, Marles said the 'human dimension' was a key challenge in securing Aukus submarines. 'We are confident that we can get this right, but we're not sanguine about it. There is a lot of work to be done to meet the human challenge, but we believe we can get it done.' Democratic Congressman Joe Courtney, co-chair of the Friends of Australia Caucus (and whose district in Connecticut includes the shipbuilding hub of Groton), as well as Republicans Michael McCaul, chair emeritus of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, were the lead signatories on the letter. Elbridge Colby, the under secretary of defence for policy at the Pentagon, is leading the 30-day US review, due to report in July. Colby has consistently declared he is 'very sceptical' about the pact and its benefits for America. He told the US Senate armed service committee that the US was not building enough submarines for its own defence, and would not sell submarines to Australia if that might jeopardise American interests. 'We don't want our servicemen and women to be in a weaker position and more vulnerable … because [the attack submarines] are not in the right place at the right time.' Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Under pillar one of the Aukus agreement, the US will sell Australia between three and five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines, with the first to be delivered in 2032. These will replace Australia's ageing Collins class diesel-electric submarines to cover the 'capability gap' before Australia's own Aukus nuclear-powered submarines can be built. By the 'late 2030s', according to Australia's submarine industry strategy, UK shipbuilders will deliver the first specifically designed and built Aukus submarine to its own Royal Navy. Australia's first Aukus submarine – based on the UK design but to be built in South Australia – will be in the water 'in the early 2040s'. Aukus is forecast to cost Australia up to $368bn to the mid-2050s. Australia is providing significant subsidies to the industrial bases of both the US and UK. It has already paid $A798m (US$500m) – the first instalment of $A4.7bn pledged – to the US. It will pay A$4.6bn to the UK. But the deal's feasibility has come under significant pressure regarding both nuclear-capable senior partners. The US navy already has a shortfall of submarines, expected to worsen over coming years, and shipyards in America are running up to three years late in building new Virginia-class submarines, a 2024 US navy report found. The UK parliament announced its own inquiry into Aukus in April, which will examine whether 'geopolitical shifts since the initial agreement in 2021' have rendered the agreement unworkable. In Australia, there have been calls from a chorus of voices – including naval experts, former prime and foreign ministers, submariners, anti-war groups, and the Greens – for a domestic inquiry into Aukus, its feasibility and potential benefits to Australia.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store