🔗 Share this article

The world is falling short in the fight against the climate crisis, but it remains engaged in that conflict, the top UN climate official declared in Belém after a bitterly contested UN climate conference concluded with a deal.

Significant Developments from the Climate Summit

Delegates during the climate talks were unable to finalize the phase-out on the fossil fuel age, due to fierce resistance from some countries spearheaded by the Saudi delegation. Moreover, they underdelivered on a flagship hope, established at a conference held in the Amazon, to map out a conclusion to clearing of woodlands.

Nevertheless, amid a conflict-ridden global era of patriotic fervor, armed conflict, and suspicion, the discussions remained intact as was feared. Multilateralism held – just.

“We knew this conference would take place in turbulent geopolitical conditions,” remarked Simon Stiell, after a long and at times angry closing session at the conference. “Denial, disunity and international politics have delivered international cooperation significant setbacks over the past year.”

But the summit showed that “climate cooperation is still vigorous”, Stiell added, making an oblique reference to the US, which under Donald Trump chose to refrain from sending a delegation to the host city. Trump, who has labeled the global warming a “hoax” and a “scam”, has personified the opposition to advancement on addressing dangerous planet warming.

“I’m not saying we’re winning the climate fight. But it is clear still in it, and we are pushing forward,” Stiell stated.

“Here in Belém, nations opted for unity, scientific evidence and sound economic principles. This year there has been a lot of attention on a particular nation stepping back. Yet amid the gale-force political headwinds, the vast majority of nations stood firm in unity – unshakable in support of environmental collaboration.”

Stiell pointed to a specific part of the summit's final text: “The worldwide shift towards reduced carbon output and environmentally sustainable growth cannot be undone and the trend of the future.” He argued: “This represents a diplomatic and market signal that cannot be ignored.”

Talks Overview

The summit began over two weeks back with the high-level segment. The Brazilian hosts promised with initial positive outlook that it would finish as scheduled, however as the discussions progressed, the confusion and obvious divisions among delegations increased, and the process seemed on the verge of failure by the end of the week. Late-night talks on Friday, however, and compromise on all sides meant a deal could be agreed the following day. The summit yielded outcomes on dozens of issues, such as a commitment to increase financial support for adaptation threefold to safeguard populations from environmental effects, an agreement for a just transition mechanism (JTM), and acknowledgment of the entitlements of Indigenous people.

However suggestions to begin developing roadmaps to transition away from oil, gas, and coal and end deforestation did not gain consensus, and were delegated to initiatives outside the UN to be advanced by coalitions of interested countries. The effects of the agricultural sector – for example cattle in cleared tracts in the rainforest – were mostly overlooked.

Feedback and Concerns

The overall package was generally viewed as minimal progress in the best case, and significantly short than needed to address the accelerating environmental emergency. “The summit started with a surge of high hopes but ended with a whimper of disappointment,” said Jasper Inventor from the environmental organization. “This was the opportunity to move from negotiations to action – and it was missed.”

The head of the United Nations, António Guterres, said advances was made, but cautioned it was becoming more difficult to secure agreements. “Climate conferences are consensus-based – and in a time of geopolitical divides, unanimity is ever harder to achieve. It would be dishonest to claim that Cop30 has provided all that is necessary. The gap between our current position and scientific requirements is still alarmingly large.”

The EU commissioner for the climate, Wopke Hoekstra, shared the sense of relief. “It is not perfect, but it is a significant advance in the correct path. Europe remained cohesive, advocating for high goals on climate action,” he remarked, even though that cohesion was severely challenged.

Just reaching a deal was positive, noted an analyst from Chatham House. “A summit failure would have been a big and damaging blow at the close of a period already marked by significant difficulties for global environmental efforts and multilateralism more broadly. It is encouraging that a deal was reached in Belém, even if numerous observers will – legitimately – be dissatisfied with the degree of ambition.”

However there was also deep frustration that, while funding for climate adaptation had been committed, the deadline had been pushed back to 2035. Mamadou Ndong Toure from Practical Action in Senegal, said: “Climate resilience cannot be established on reduced pledges; communities on the frontline require reliable, accountable support and a clear path to take action.”

Indigenous Rights and Fossil Fuel Controversies

Similarly, while the host nation marketed Cop30 as the “Conference for Native Peoples” and the deal acknowledged for the first time native communities' land rights and knowledge as a fundamental environmental answer, there were still concerns that participation was limited. “Despite being called as an Indigenous Cop … it became clear that native groups continue to be excluded from the negotiations,” stated a representative of the Kichwa Peoples of Sarayaku.

Moreover there was frustration that the concluding document had not referred directly to oil and gas. James Dyke from the University of Exeter, observed: “Regardless of the host’s best efforts, Cop30 will not even be able to persuade countries to consent to ending fossil fuel use. This shameful outcome is the result of short-sighted agendas and opportunistic maneuvering.”

Activism and Prospects Ahead

Following a number of years of these annual international environmental conferences held in authoritarian-led countries, there were outbreaks of colourful protest in Belem as activist groups returned in force. A major march with many thousands of demonstrators lit up the middle Saturday of the summit and activists expressed their views in an typically dull, formal Belém conference centre.

“Beginning with Indigenous-led demonstrations on site to the over seventy thousand individuals who protested in the city, there was a palpable sense of progress that I have not experienced for a long time,” said an activist leader from Fossil Free Media.

At least, concluded observers, a path ahead exists. Prof Michael Grubb from University College London, commented: “The damp squib of an conclusion from the summit has underlined that a focus on the phasing out of fossil fuels is filled with diplomatic hurdles. Looking ahead to the next conference, the attention must be complemented by equal attention to the positive – the {huge economic potential|