The transition away from fossil fuel reduces conflict drivers

The initiative was born in 2020 out of a glaring gap in global climate governance. The COP process is all about regulating emissions, but fails to address the root cause of the problem: our lasting addiction and dependency on fossil fuels. 

The Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative was inspired by the non-proliferation nuclear treaty and the treaty to ban landmines. The latter substantially reduced the production, manufacturing and use of landmines. Our key aim today is to get countries to agree that we must be serious about stopping new investments in coal, oil, and gas.

The first thing is non-proliferation: stop the spread of the problem. The second thing is to have a fair, fast and funded phase out. Thirdly, we need the transition away from fossil fuels to be a just transition for workers and communities. That is why we need a clear and binding plan. 

Just imagine one day you rush off to work in a hurry and when you come back home you realize water is coming out of the bathroom. So you pick up the mop and proceed to the bathroom. There, you discover that the tap was leaking, the bathtub filled up over the day and is now overflowing. When you are faced with this picture, what do you do? Do you start mopping the floor first or do you turn off the tap first?

Correct. But what we have been doing for more than 30 years is mopping the problem without turning off the tap. The focus has been on emissions, not on extraction. That's just not going to cut it. We can't solve the climate crisis while expanding the very fossil fuels driving it. 

We hope that fossil fuels will become clearly seen as linked to the geopolitical conflicts of our time. Climate action can be seen as part of a global peace and security agenda. Our core point is that the transition away from fossil fuel reduces conflict drivers.

This is due to the power of the fossil fuel companies. The largest delegations at every conference are the fossil fuel lobbyists. That's like Alcoholics Anonymous having an annual global conference for 30 years, and the largest delegation is the alcohol industry. Powerful countries, especially in the Global North, have looked at short-term economic interests rather than long-term security for people and communities. We've been calling for a fair, ambitious,and binding (FAB) deal since the Copenhagen conference in 2009. What we get year in, year out from the COPs is a FLAB deal full of loopholes and bullshit.     

The COP operates by consensus. This means that petro states like the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Australia are able to serve as blockers. Some governments have conflicting roles since they are both producers and negotiators. Saudi Aramco, for example, is a state-owned entity. So, they come in and push their agenda. To be clear though, COP is really important, but it's insufficient alone. Our initiative is meant to complement, not to replace UN processes.

The first countries to step forward were from the Pacific, Vanuatu, and Tuvalu. Today, we have 20 countries that have endorsed the initiative, and another 15 countries that are part of the conversation. We hope that further negotiations will start later this year following the First Conference on Transition Away from Fossil Fuels in April 2026 in Santa Marta, Colombia. 

In 30 years of COP negotiations, the term fossil fuels was only mentioned once – and in a very weak way – two years ago. The Santa Marta conference being organized by Colombia, the Pacific Islands States, and the Netherlands would be the first major convention focusing on transitioning away from fossil fuels. It's the first in the series of diplomatic conferences building the coalition of the ambitious. 

The second one is already planned for the Pacific as a follow-up, which should be the starting point of negotiations. Our hope is to see a shift from advocacy to implementation.

We're looking for phase-out pathways. How can countries phase out of fossil fuels in a way that doesn't harm their economies and their children's future? Because the struggle to do something about catastrophic climate change is nothing more than protecting our children. The expected outcomes are phase-out pathways, financing mechanisms, equity and justice frameworks, strong Global South leadership, and multi-stakeholder participation including governments, local governments, civil society, and indigenous leaders. The key message that will hopefully come out of Santa Marta is that we'll turn ambition into accountability. 

Right now, we hope to have at least 60 governments participate. There's a civil society summit and participation from local and subnational governments. We have thousands of civil society organizations, indigenous nations, churches, trade unions and faith groups involved. There will also be a scientific and academic conference taking place.

This development is driven by economic anxiety and the fact that working class people in Europe are not getting their fair share of the societal dividends. The fossil fuel industry is leveraging job fears and energy price concerns to falsely frame fossil energy resources as cheap and reliable. 

However, if you factor in the trillions of dollars that go into fossil fuel subsidies, which is taxpayer money, fossil energy is hardly as cheap as people might be fooled into believing. The strategic response that Europe needs is to include justice, jobs, livelihoods, and communities in climate messaging. If this transition is not happening in Europe, it will not happen elsewhere.

The Global South must not see themselves primarily as victims but as leaders. They have lots of advantages like abundant renewable resources. In Africa, we have abundant solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass potential. The successful governments and countries of the future will be those that get far ahead of the green technology curve now. The key area where the Global South needs to make transitions is in the area of climate finance that has been promised through the Green Climate Fund, and the Loss and Damage Fund in the UNFCCC COP process. We need technology transfer because a lot of the technological skills are sitting in the Global North. There's an opportunity for Africa and the Global South to leapfrog other parts of the world when it comes to clean energy systems. We should not be repeating the mistakes of the Global North, which carries the biggest responsibility for historical accumulated emissions.

The first answer here is the rapid and continuing decline in renewable energy costs. The second is growing support from cities, countries, and institutions to realize a fossil fuel phase out. The third is strong youth and civil society activism. Fossil fuels are increasingly seen as financially risky and socially unacceptable. 

However, that momentum is not guaranteed. There is some pessimism that arises from our analysis, our observations, and our lived experiences. This pessimism, however, is something we cannot afford. It must be responded to with the optimism of our thought, our action, our creativity, our courage, and our sense of humanity