Morgan: 'Is the UAE part of the solution or the past?'

Ms. Morgan, from an outsider's perspective, the negotiations seem to be stuck several days before the end: There's a very long text with all options for a fossil exit, which is not decisive. The process for adapting to climate change is blocked and slowing down everything else. Is it normal for things to be stuck like this a few days before the end?

Is it stuck? Well, we have detailed discussions about a faster energy transition with all major stakeholders. That's a big difference from last year. On the other hand, we see that the Arab group is preventing a real discussion on adaptation. An agreement in this area would be crucial, as it rightly is the top priority for island nations and African states. Therefore, the EU is having many discussions on adaptation.

Could the reason for the blockade be precisely to prevent an approach between Africa and the EU, which would also help with the fossil exit?

I'm less concerned about the process than about the fact that not all countries and groups negotiate constructively. In adaptation, we're not even talking about the text yet, just about the procedure. Blocking text work, as a few groups do, is already a very tough measure. Some call it hostage-taking. But slowly, we see how the overall package could look, even though the text is still very long. Now the presidency has to put together the package with options for the ministers to decide. The text should be ready by Sunday.

How professional is the presidency's work?

It is still very transparent, another significant difference from last year. They have a good team, but the moment of truth is when the text comes. Is it balanced? Ambitious?

Some say COP28 is the last gasp of fossil fuels. Do you see it that way too?

The question is: Why are there so many fossil lobbyists here? Last year, the question of an exit was negotiated in a dark room where a few countries said no. Now it's right in the center of things. Many fossil interests are here because they know: This is the showdown between fossil fuels and the planet. And they are here, trying to prevent the urgently needed end of fossil fuels for their own interests.

Minister Baerbock and others draw a parallel between this COP and the conference in Paris. Is Dubai like Paris?

Yes, a bit. It's about a comprehensive package. The GST is the implementation of Paris. And there's also this feeling: We are at a turning point. In Paris, the question was: Can we achieve an agreement? Now it's: Can we fill the agreement with ambition and use the mechanisms? For most countries, the question is: How do we do this? Many emerging and developing countries are worried that the transition is happening too fast. But the positive thing is: We're talking about how to do it, about power grids and storage, about financial mechanisms or investments in Africa. We're talking about reality, about the economy. And then there are the oil-producing states that haven't prepared and diversified like other countries.

But Germany sends mixed signals with its climate foreign policy strategy, especially regarding the fossil exit.

I don't think so. The foreign policy strategy is fully in line with the EU position.

The text, however, mentions the exit from "unabated fossil fuels".

It is the EU's position that abatement, if at all, is only an option for hard-to-decarbonize sectors. But otherwise, a predominantly fossil-free energy system is required. That is an EU Council decision. Everything in the strategy is in line with the conclusions.

There is only "unabated" in the summary, not for the "hard to abate" sectors.

There is now a footnote to clarify the position in its entirety. That was just the summary, not because it's a different position. Again, our position here is the EU position.

But if other countries like Saudi Arabia or Russia say: We're not talking about an exit at all. How can you come together?

These countries have the duty to understand what their position means: namely, the end of island nations. And they have to think about their role in the world – what do they want? We are in a climate crisis. Are they part of the solution? Some are heading in that direction. Or are they the blockade? If this COP fails, everyone knows who the blockers are: that these states prioritize their short-term interests over the interests of island nations, African states and many people.

How diplomatic or undiplomatic are you in these negotiations when it comes to such fundamental issues?

Now is the time for plain talk. In the negotiation rooms, we speak very clearly about individual sentences and words. On other occasions, it's more important to speak diplomatically or say nothing. And let other countries say something. The island nations and the least developed countries are very important here.

Germany has not signed twice with the High Ambition Coalition. Will you do it here at the summit?

I assume so. Germany is an active member of the HAC. If there is a statement, we are in.

Is it always helpful when the ministers negotiate, especially when it comes to such fundamental issues? Wouldn't many things be better clarified by the experts?

Experts are talking to each other all the time. But now is the time for political decisions. Ministers have to do that. It's about tough political decisions, where you can go along or not.

Above all, the UAE is facing a decision on whether they want to end this COP with a fossil exit.

Yes, the UAE has a great responsibility. As COP presidency, they must clearly position themselves: Are they part of the solution and the future, participating in the energy transition? Or are they part of the past? They say they want a very ambitious COP full of solutions – now is the moment to show that.