🔗 Share this article

The world is not winning the struggle to combat the climate crisis, but it continues involved in that effort, the UN climate chief declared in Belém after a highly disputed UN climate conference concluded with a pact.

Significant Developments from the Climate Summit

Nations during the climate talks were unable to put an end on the era of fossil fuels, amid fierce resistance from a group of states spearheaded by Saudi Arabia. Moreover, they fell short on a key aspiration, established at a summit taking place in the Amazon rainforest, to chart an end to deforestation.

However, during a conflict-ridden period worldwide of patriotic fervor, war, and suspicion, the talks did not collapse as many had worried. Global diplomacy prevailed – just.

“We knew this conference was scheduled in turbulent geopolitical conditions,” remarked Simon Stiell, after a long and at times heated closing session at the climate summit. “Denial, division and geopolitics has dealt global collaboration some heavy blows over the past year.”

Yet Cop30 showed that “environmental collaboration is alive and kicking”, the official added, alluding indirectly to the US, which under Donald Trump opted to not send anyone to Belém. Trump, who has called the climate crisis a “hoax” and a “scam”, has come to embody the resistance to progress on dealing with dangerous climate change.

“I’m not saying we are prevailing in the battle against climate change. However we are undeniably still engaged, and we are resisting,” he said.

“Here in Belém, nations chose unity, scientific evidence and sound economic principles. Recently there has been significant focus on a particular nation stepping back. But despite the intense political opposition, 194 countries stood firm in unity – unshakable in support of climate cooperation.”

The climate chief pointed to a specific part of the Cop30 agreement: “The global transition to low greenhouse gas emissions and environmentally sustainable growth cannot be undone and the trend of the future.” He emphasized: “This represents a political and economic signal that must be heeded.”

Talks Overview

The conference commenced more than a fortnight ago with the high-level segment. The Brazilian hosts promised with initial positive outlook that it would finish as scheduled, however as the negotiations progressed, the confusion and obvious divisions between parties grew, and the proceedings looked close to collapse by the end of the week. Late-night talks that day, however, and concessions from every party meant a agreement could be agreed the following day. The conference produced decisions on multiple topics, such as a commitment to increase financial support for adaptation threefold to protect communities from climate impacts, an accord for a fair shift framework, and recognition of the entitlements of Indigenous people.

However suggestions to start planning roadmaps to shift from oil, gas, and coal and end deforestation were not approved, and were hived off to initiatives outside the UN to be advanced by coalitions of interested countries. The impacts of the agricultural sector – such as cattle in cleared tracts in the rainforest – were mostly overlooked.

Feedback and Concerns

The final agreement was largely seen as incremental in the best case, and significantly short than needed to tackle the accelerating climate crisis. “The summit began with a bang of ambition but concluded with a sense of letdown,” commented Jasper Inventor from the environmental organization. “This represented the opportunity to move from talks to implementation – and it slipped.”

The head of the United Nations, António Guterres, said advances were achieved, but cautioned it was increasingly challenging to secure consensus. “Cops are consensus-based – and in a period of geopolitical divides, unanimity is increasingly difficult to achieve. I cannot pretend that this conference has provided everything that is necessary. The disparity between our current position and scientific requirements remains alarmingly large.”

The EU commissioner for the environment, Wopke Hoekstra, shared the feeling of relief. “The outcome is imperfect, but it is a huge step in the correct path. The EU stood united, advocating for ambition on climate action,” he stated, despite the fact that that unity was sorely tested.

Just reaching a deal was positive, said Anna Åberg from Chatham House. “A summit failure would have been a big and harmful setback at the close of a year characterized by serious challenges for global environmental efforts and international diplomacy in general. It is encouraging that a deal was concluded in the host city, even if numerous observers will – legitimately – be dissatisfied with the degree of aspiration.”

But there was additionally significant discontent that, while adaptation finance had been committed, the target date had been delayed to 2035. Mamadou Ndong Toure from a development organization in Senegal, said: “Climate resilience cannot be established on reduced pledges; communities on the front lines need predictable, accountable support and a definite plan to take action.”

Native Communities' Issues and Fossil Fuel Disputes

In a comparable vein, although the host nation marketed Cop30 as the “Indigenous Cop” and the deal acknowledged for the first time native communities' land rights and knowledge as a fundamental climate solution, there were nonetheless concerns that participation was limited. “Despite being called as an Indigenous Cop … it became clear that native groups continue to be left out from the negotiations,” stated Emil Gualinga of the Kichwa Peoples of Sarayaku.

Moreover there was disappointment that the concluding document had not referred directly to fossil fuels. a climate expert from the University of Exeter, observed: “Despite the organizers' best efforts, the conference failed to get nations to consent to ending fossil fuel use. This regrettable result is the consequence of narrow self-interest and cynical politicking.”

Activism and Prospects Ahead

After a number of years of these yearly UN climate gatherings hosted by authoritarian-led countries, there were outbreaks of colourful protest in the host city as activist groups returned in force. A large protest with tens of thousands of protesters lit up the midpoint of the conference and advocates expressed their views in an typically dull, formal summit venue.

“From protests by native groups at the venue to the more than 70,000 people who marched in the streets, there was a tangible feeling of momentum that I have not experienced for years,” said Jamie Henn from an advocacy group.

At least, concluded watchers, a path ahead remains. Prof Michael Grubb from University College London, commented: “The underwhelming result of an conclusion from the summit has underlined that a emphasis on the phasing out of fossil fuels is filled with diplomatic hurdles. For the road to Cop31, the attention must be complemented by equal attention to the benefits – the {huge economic potential|