From above, the vast Congolian rainforest seems peaceful and quiet. On the ground, it is full of noises, ranging from the calls of 1,000 species of bird to the cries of forest elephants, chimpanzees and some of the world's last gorillas.

But newer sounds can be heard in the distance, growing louder by the day. The wheezing sounds of vehicles. The high-pitched whining and scraping of logging and drilling.

This week, the Democratic Republic of CongoA country in central Africa with a population of 99 million. (DRC), which controls the majority of this rainforest, announced that it would auction much of it off to oil and gas companies. These blocks of land include parts of a vital gorilla sanctuary and tropical peatlands that act as a massive carbon sinkA forest, ocean or other natural environment able to absorb large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The Amazon rainforest, for example, absorbs two billion tons of carbon dioxide each year..

If these auctions go ahead, global temperatures will shoot up. Experts fear it will be the end of the fight against a climate catastrophe. There will be no going back.

So it is little wonder that they have caused an outcry elsewhere in the world. But the Congolese government is unrepentantShowing no regret for wrongdoing. .

It points out that since Russia's invasion of Ukraine caused a global energy crisis, the western world's commitment to decarbonising has evaporated. The USA is begging for oil all over the Middle East. Europe is pumping natural gas from Egypt.

The DRC is one of the poorest countries in the world. Yet it is extremely rich in natural resources. It claims it simply wants to do what the Western world did: use its resources to spark economic growth and give its people jobs and education. "Our priority is not to save the planet," declared one Congolese official.

Western countries have been burning large quantities of fossil fuels for almost three centuries. All in all, just 23 developed countries have produced half of all historical carbon emissions. The USA alone is responsible for around a quarter of all emissions, despite making up just 4% of the global population.

Rich countries have benefited enormously from its use of fossil fuels. Industry powered by dirty fuels has produced huge wealth for its people. This wealth has been used to provide education, healthcare and a much better quality of life in the West.

But only a small part of the world benefited from the fossil fuels boom. In fact, many lost out as richer countries colonised them for resources. 

It is hypocritical, the DRC argues, for rich countries to tell poor countries that they must stay poor to save the world from a climate crisis that the rich countries created.

Yet the argument is not so straightforward. Handing drilling contracts over to multinational corporations does not necessarily create wealth for local people. Instead, it is often hoarded by a small elite, while ordinary people suffer from the effects of environmental degradation.

Many other parts of Africa have fallen victim to Dutch disease, in which a country invests too much in a single resource and neglects the wider economy. Then when that resource loses its value, the entire economy plunges. So the DRC might not see any real gain from exploiting its rainforest at all.

Yes: Whether or not it is fair for rich countries to behave this way, it is the poorest countries that stand to lose the most from climate breakdown. For their own sake, they must take it seriously.

No: The Western world has got filthy rich from burning dirty fuels. Now rich countries have a responsibility to use that wealth to save the world from the mess that they themselves have created.

Or... Rich countries must compensate poor countries for missing out on development. The developed world pledged just over £400m to help the DRC preserve its ecology. It must commit more resources.