Climate talks in Bonn right now are not going so well.

On the weekend, there was a session on trade and climate, and the G77 nations including China, the Africa group, the Arab group, all attacked developed countries for failing to do their fair share to cut emissions and open up trade to everyone.

The Arab group signalled the west was extracting too much from emerging countries in the trade system, reverting to unilateral measures. The US has changed its tariff regimes, sometimes against its own laws, and Europe’s deployed its CBAM, or carbon border adjustment mechanism.

So …the world remains at this tense standoff, and it’s not looking so good. Indeed, the climate injustice is worsening.

Meantime, Japan and Australia are trialling a “voluntary” system that would determine how to deal with embedded emissions in traded goods such as steel. See the WTO, UNFCCC etc snips, below.

Such a system might make it even harder for emerging-nation steel exporters.

Arab Group was barnstorming:

“If corrective and cooperative approaches are not possible, we then call for remedial action. Developed countries shall then provide finance to affected countries at a scale commensurate and proportionate to impacts.

The unilateral and coercive actions taken by some parties are flipping this regime and its foundations on its head.

Instead of finance to developing countries, we’re now witnessing finance extracted from developing countries.

Instead of nationally determined policies and standards, we are now witnessing the economically powerful impose their pathways and standards on those least responsible for climate change.

Instead of realizing the right to development, we are witnessing attempts to cling on to industrial superiority, as if this was a predestined right.

Instead of international cooperation to reflect equity and the principle of CBDR*, we’re witnessing unilateralism and fragmentation.

We’re not here today because we want to be here today. We’re not here today because we didn’t speak up. We are here because we spoke up bilaterally, and our concerns were ignored.

We have no choice but to resort to the multilateral system, the same multilateral system that some purport to support.”

Barnstorming and bombed Arab countries

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is attending the G7 summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada this week as an invited guest of the Canadian government. Australia is not a G7 member, but it is frequently invited to participate in discussions on security, trade, critical minerals, and Indo-Pacific issues.  

This year’s summit runs from 15–17 June, and invited non-G7 leaders include those from Australia, India, South Korea, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Ukraine, and the UAE.  

Albanese has confirmed his participation and has already been holding meetings on the sidelines of the summit.  

A major focus this year is expected to be the conflict between Israel and Iran, alongside trade tensions, economic security, critical minerals, and AI-related issues.  

Global south and EU are feeling attacked by Trump

E3G – environment group -media advisory on European Council Meeting 18-19 June 2026
Also G7:

EU Leaders face mounting geopolitical pressures at June European Council

EU leaders are slated to meet on 18-19 June at a time when Europe is confronted with a convergence of pressures: from the ongoing war in Ukraine, to conflict in the Middle East and associated energy crisis, to the bloc’s tense relations with China. This context is ushering in a broader debate about Europe’s independence model, which will hold implications for more concrete decisions on investment, security, competitiveness and Europe’s clean transition model.

While discussions on the next Europe budget – the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2028-2034 – are unlikely to be made public at this time, the Cyprus Presidency will present the first set of figures for negotiation, allowing EU leaders to hold a substantive political exchange. Divisions have already emerged over the size of the budget and how to balance traditional spending areas such as agriculture and cohesion with rising demands for defence, competitiveness, strategic technologies and energy security, as well as the EU’s capacity to act more strategically on the global stage.

Ukraine, migration and wider global instability will remain core agenda items, with leaders expected to review continued EU support for Kyiv, migration management ahead of the summer period, and the EU’s positioning amid broader international crises in the Middle East and beyond.
More on this story and media contacts at https://www.e3g.org/news/eu-leaders-face-mounting-geopolitical-pressures-at-june-european-council/

Quotes
Manon Dufour, Executive Director, E3G Brussels, said:
“Moments of crisis can expose weakness, but they can also create purpose. The next great European project is energy independence – strengthening security, restoring competitiveness and delivering lasting prosperity.

Europe does not lack capital; it lacks mechanisms to turn European savings towards European priorities. The next MFF should be judged by a simple test: does it help Europe invest in its own security, competitiveness and future?”

Luke O Callaghan-White , Programme Lead, EU Energy Transition, said:
“A Europe that continues to rely on fossil fuels, continues to put our energy security at risk. Leaders are faced with a choice: continue to push short term fixes that will cost us billions, or finally prioritise investments in a future-proof and resilient energy system. Europeans have clearly recognized that less fossil fuels are the only path to security. Now is the moment for leaders to act.”

Domien Vangenechten , Programme Lead, EU Clean Economy, said:
“Fossil dependency, geopolitical shocks and China’s industrial might have exposed Europe’s vulnerabilities, but a transformed industrial base is the key to turning these pressures into long-term advantage. If leaders show real resolve on climate and industrial policy – through a bolstered budget that unleashes the necessary investments, stronger lead markets, and a robust ETS that delivers predictability – Europe can prove that sustained climate ambition backed by coherent industrial and trade policy – is the best long-term strategy against global uncertainty.”

Tefta Kelmendi , Programme Lead, Climate Diplomacy & Geopolitics, E3G, said:
“Dealing with China’s economic pressure has become more urgent for the EU as geopolitical shocks multiply. Defending European industries and securing supply chains is crucial not just for the EU’s economic security, but also for its broader geopolitical interests, including the EU’s ability to shape the conditions of its own clean transition and that of its partners. The latest tensions with China around the EU Industrial Accelerator Act and possible additional trade defence measures show that the EU is finally using its tools more strategically to protect its interests and to avoid deepening dependencies, including on clean energy and tech supply chains that are crucial for the energy transition.”

A further perspective on the G7 is published at https://www.e3g.org/news/why-the-g7-summit-still-matters-for-climate/
Recent polling shows that a majority of Europeans back reducing fossil fuel imports to make Europe safer. https://www.e3g.org/publications/europeans-back-reducing-fossil-fuel-imports/
At the same time, today, a diverse group of 21 organisations across finance, energy, consumers is calling on European leaders to make this the last fossil fuel crisis. https://www.e3g.org/news/cross-sector-coalition-calls-on-european-council-to-end-fossil-fuel-dependence/

Notes to editors
E3G is an independent think tank working to deliver a safe climate for all. We drive systemic action on climate by identifying barriers and constructing coalitions to advance the solutions needed. We create spaces for honest dialogue, and help guide governments, businesses and the public on how to deliver change at the page the planet demands.

For further enquiries email press@e3g.org or phone +44 (0)7783 787 863

——

*In the UN climate regime, CBDR-RC stands for Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities.

It is one of the core principles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and means:

• Common responsibilities: all countries share responsibility for addressing climate change.
• Differentiated responsibilities: countries do not all bear the same level of responsibility, particularly because industrialized countries have contributed more to historical greenhouse-gas emissions.
• Respective capabilities: countries’ obligations should reflect their economic and technological capacity to act.

The principle is formally expressed in Article 3 of the UNFCCC and was carried forward into the Paris Agreement, which refers to acting “in the light of different national circumstances.”

In practice, CBDR-RC is often at the center of debates over:

• Emissions reduction targets.
• Climate finance.
• Technology transfer.
• Responsibility for loss and damage from climate impacts.

Developing countries frequently invoke CBDR-RC to argue that wealthier countries should take the lead in cutting emissions and providing financial support, while developed countries tend to emphasize that major emerging economies should also make substantial contributions given their current emissions and growing capabilities.

So the acronym is CBDR-RC, not CDPR. It’s one of the most important concepts in international climate negotiations.