🔗 Share this article

When dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained trapped in a windowless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in tense discussions, with dozens ministers representing multiple blocs of countries ranging from the most vulnerable nations to the richest economies.

Tempers were short, the air stifling as sweaty delegates faced up to the sobering reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations hovered near the brink of total collapse.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for well over a century, the CO2 emissions produced by consuming fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to critical levels.

However, during more than three decades of regular climate meetings, the crucial requirement to cease fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "shift from fossil fuels". Representatives from the Gulf states, Russia, and several other countries were determined this would not occur another time.

Increasing pressure for change

Simultaneously, a expanding group of countries were similarly resolved that movement on this issue was urgently necessary. They had developed a plan that was earning growing support and made it clear they were ready to hold firm.

Emerging economies urgently needed to advance on securing financial assistance to help them address the increasingly severe impacts of climate disasters.

Breaking point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were willing to withdraw and force a collapse. "The situation was precarious for us," remarked one government representative. "I was prepared to walk away."

The critical development happened through talks with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, principal delegates split from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the lead Saudi negotiator. They pressed language that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

Rather than explicitly referencing fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly accepted the wording.

Delegates collapsed into relief. Cheers erupted. The settlement was finalized.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took another small step towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a hesitant, inadequate step that will barely interrupt the climate's steady march towards disaster. But nevertheless a notable change from total inaction.

Key elements of the agreement

• Alongside the indirect reference in the official document, countries will commence creating a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a non-binding program led by Brazil that will provide updates next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to not exceed the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries secured a threefold increase to $120bn of annual finance to help them manage the impacts of climate disasters
• This amount will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors shift to the renewable industry

Differing opinions

With global conditions hovers near the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could destroy ecosystems and force whole regions into disorder, the agreement was insufficient as the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Cop30 gave us some small advances in the right direction, but considering the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion," stated one environmental analyst.

This flawed deal might have been the best attainable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a US president who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, persistent fighting in different locations, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic uncertainty.

"Major polluters – the oil and gas companies – were ultimately in the spotlight at the climate summit," says one environmental advocate. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The opportunity is accessible. Now we must turn it into a real fire escape to a safer world."

Significant divisions revealed

While nations were able to celebrate the formal approval of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted major disagreements in the primary worldwide framework for addressing the climate crisis.

"International summits are consensus-based, and in a time of global disagreements, unanimity is progressively challenging to reach," commented one senior UN official. "It would be dishonest to claim that this summit has provided all that is needed. The gap between our current position and what evidence necessitates remains concerningly substantial."

If the world is to avoid the most severe impacts of climate breakdown, the UN climate talks alone will prove insufficient.