CLIMATE FINANCE AND STRATEGIC LEVERAGING; A case study of DRC.
Reflecting on this case study, the DRC used its natural resources as a way to gain attention and power in climate talks. By announcing oil and gas auctions in 2022, the government showed that if rich countries do not provide enough climate funds, it may choose to develop fossil fuels instead. This created pressure, at the same time, the DRC reminded the world that it protects one of the largest rainforests on Earth, which helps absorb carbon dioxide. Through REDD+ programs, the country argued that it should be paid for protecting forests that benefit the whole world.
Working with other rainforest countries like Brazil and Indonesia also made the DRC stronger in negotiations. By joining groups such as the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, the DRC was not speaking alone. Together, these countries pushed for more climate funding and fair treatment. Secondly, acting as a group gave them more influence than acting individually.
The idea of “loss and damage” is important here because the DRC has produced very less pollution compared to rich countries, yet it suffers from climate change. Because of this, it argues that countries that caused most of the problem should help pay for the damage. This connects to the larger debate in the Global South about fairness and responsibility.
Ethically, this strategy is complicated. Threatening to develop oil in order to get climate money may seem wrong because it risks environmental harm. However, the DRC is also a poor country that needs development. Therefore, If rich nations do not provide enough support, the government may feel it has no other choice. In that way, the DRC’s actions highlight the unfairness in the global climate system rather than simple greed.