Dr. Yamina Saheb:

My answer to the first question is, unfortunately, yes, we are wasting our time. It is unlikely that the treaty could be made Paris-compatible. The time and great effort that, as Europeans, we are putting into the fake modernisation of this treaty is a waste of time.

The second question is on Article 16. The treaty is in practice above any other international agreement or treaty. This is how the intra-EU cases have been justified so far by private arbitrators. There is a high risk that the ECJ ruling shows that the intra-EU disputes violate EU law, which is something that several other lawyers used to say. It is good to have this ruling from the ECJ. However, it is likely that arbitrators outside the EU will not consider this ruling and, again, this means a continuation of the treaty. The risk of continuation is quite high, even for intra-EU disputes.

Regarding the ethical question, as someone who is at the same time from the global North and the global South, I feel uncomfortable that my country, France, and my other continent, Europe, still see the South as just a source for our investors in the North, without taking into account that climate change does not recognise our administrative borders and that the global South is in huge need of moving directly and leapfrogging from its current situation, where there is a lack of access to energy, directly to renewable energy. As a climate change scientist, I know this is scientifically doable. That is why I feel extremely bad and sorry for the global South if the global South is locked in the treaty because we do not manage, as Europeans, to have the courage to end this treaty.