🔗 Share this article

While dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained trapped in a airless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in tense discussions, with dozens ministers representing various coalitions of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the wealthiest economies.

Patience wore thin, the air heavy as weary delegates confronted the harsh reality: there would not be a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The latest global climate summit hovered near the brink of complete breakdown.

The major obstacle: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for nearly a century, the carbon dioxide produced by consuming fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to dangerous levels.

Nevertheless, during nearly three decades of yearly climate meetings, the essential necessity to stop fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "transition away from fossil fuels". Officials from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and a few other countries were resolved this would not occur another time.

Increasing pressure for change

Simultaneously, a increasing coalition of countries were equally determined that movement on this issue was vitally needed. They had formulated a plan that was earning increasing support and made it clear they were willing to dig in.

Emerging economies strongly sought to make progress on securing financial assistance to help them manage the already disastrous impacts of climate disasters.

Critical moment

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were willing to leave and trigger failure. "We were close for us," remarked one government representative. "I was ready to walk away."

The pivotal moment happened through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, principal delegates separated from the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the chief 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

Instead of explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". After consideration, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly accepted the wording.

The room collapsed into relief. Applause rang out. The agreement was completed.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took a modest advance towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a hesitant, limited step that will barely interrupt the climate's ongoing trajectory towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a notable change from total inaction.

Major components of the agreement

• In addition to the oblique commitment in the legally agreed text, countries will start developing a roadmap to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be largely a non-binding program led by Brazil that will provide updates next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries secured a significant expansion to $120bn of annual finance to help them cope with the impacts of environmental crises
• This amount will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in high-carbon industries move toward the renewable industry

Differing opinions

With global conditions teeters on the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could devastate environments and plunge whole regions into chaos, the agreement was insufficient as the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Cop30 gave us some baby steps in the right direction, but in light of the scale of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," stated one policy director.

This flawed deal might have been the best attainable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a American leader who shunned the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the increasing presence of conservative movements, continuing wars in multiple regions, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic uncertainty.

"The climate arsonists – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the spotlight at the climate summit," notes one environmental advocate. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The platform is open. Now we must transform it into a real fire escape to a protected environment."

Deep fissures revealed

Although nations were able to welcome the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also exposed major disagreements in the primary worldwide framework for addressing the climate crisis.

"International summits are consensus-based, and in a era of international tensions, unanimity is increasingly difficult to reach," observed one senior UN official. "It would be dishonest to claim that Cop30 has achieved complete success that is needed. The difference between our current position and what research requires remains concerningly substantial."

When the world is to avoid the worst ravages of climate breakdown, the UN climate talks alone will prove insufficient.