The carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) has become “the talk” of COP28, highly criticized by organizations such as the UN or the WTO and by countries like China; But European negotiators have come out firmly in defense of the tariff: “whoever tries to destroy it will destroy much more than the CBAM.”
The EU bloc, very reluctant to address the controversy surrounding the measure at the beginning of the climate summit, has raised its tone in recent days, responding aggressively to criticism by insisting that it is not a policy ” not at all” protectionist and ensuring that it seeks to “balance the playing field.”
This type of climate tax, which has just come into force in the EU, will be applied from January 2026, but it is already in a pilot phase that only affects sectors with a high carbon footprint, such as steel, cement, fertilizers, aluminum, hydrogen or electricity.
China, Saudi Arabia and Russia are some of the States that raised their concerns to the WTO.
Russia, for example, said it did not understand “why third country exporters should bear the costs of EU industry compliance with national environmental legislation.”
Asked by the press about how this controversy was affecting the climate discussions in Dubai, the European negotiators were initially evasive.
“We are in the realm of negotiation and here we do not talk about the policies of each party,” concluded the EU climate advisor, Jacob Werksman.
The head of the EU delegation at COP28 denied that the CBAM was undermining the negotiations and assured that, in any case, there has been “a growing desire on the part of the parties to have a conversation on what are called unilateral trade measures.” “.
“We don’t expect the talks to derail, especially because I don’t think any country wants this to be a forum for discussion about any party’s particular policies,” Werksman said.
If we continue down this path, countries would engage in discussions about each other’s trade decisions, and “there is already another space for that,” he argued, referring to the WTO.
However, criticism of CBAM has not gone anywhere: in an interview with EFE, Rebeca Grynspan, secretary general of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, described the measure as “arbitrary” and “not very supportive.” and said it would open the door for “environmental safeguards to become a new protectionism.”
Politics has become “the talk” of COP28, socialist MEP Mohammed Chahim, rapporteur of the legislation in the European Parliament, acknowledged to EFE, who insisted on defending this mechanism as, above all, a “climate policy” and “in absolute protectionist.”
“At the end of the day, when you take climate change seriously and want to keep the 1.5 degree goal within reach, you have to go beyond the emissions from production in your own country… What we do is take responsibility also from emissions based on consumption, that is, from products manufactured outside the EU for the European market,” stressed the Dutch politician.
In its legislative process, the measure was adopted with a majority, also with the support of conservative MEPs such as the popular Peter Liese.
This, in fact, arrived at COP28 blocking attacks on this star politician, under the severe warning that whoever had come to Dubai with the intention of destroying it, “will destroy much more than the CBAM.”
The European Commissioner for Climate Action, Wopke Hoekstra, also argued that the CBAM proceeds will mostly go to EU climate financing.
However, it is difficult to know with certainty how much and in what way, since that will depend at the time on the budget negotiation in the Commission.
“The income from CBAM will be reflected in the budget line for international climate finance,” argued Chahim, who clarified that a part will go to the Member States: they will decide how to use it, but “they will have to be urged” to use it for climate action.