🔗 Share this article

The world isn't prevailing in the battle to combat the climate crisis, but it continues involved in that conflict, the UN climate chief stated in Belém after a bitterly contested Cop30 reached a pact.

Major Results from Cop30

Nations at Cop30 were unable to bring the curtain down on the dependency on oil and gas, due to fierce resistance from some countries spearheaded by Saudi Arabia. Moreover, they underdelivered on a flagship hope, forged at a conference held in the Amazon, to map out a conclusion to deforestation.

Nevertheless, during a conflict-ridden global era of patriotic fervor, armed conflict, and distrust, the discussions avoided breakdown as many had worried. Global diplomacy prevailed – just.

“We were aware this conference was scheduled in turbulent geopolitical conditions,” remarked the UN’s climate chief, after a extended and occasionally angry closing session at the conference. “Denial, disunity and international politics has dealt global collaboration significant setbacks this year.”

Yet the summit demonstrated that “climate cooperation is still vigorous”, the official continued, making an oblique reference to the US, which under Donald Trump chose to refrain from sending a delegation to the host city. The former US leader, who has labeled the climate crisis a “hoax” and a “con job”, has personified the resistance to progress on dealing with dangerous climate change.

“I’m not saying we are prevailing in the battle against climate change. But it is clear still engaged, and we are fighting back,” Stiell said.

“Here in Belém, nations opted for unity, science and economic common sense. Recently we have seen significant focus on one country withdrawing. But despite the gale-force political headwinds, the vast majority of nations stood firm in unity – unshakable in support of climate cooperation.”

Stiell pointed to one section of the summit's final text: “The global transition to low greenhouse gas emissions and environmentally sustainable growth is irreversible and the trend of the future.” He argued: “This is a political and market signal that cannot be ignored.”

Summit Proceedings

The summit began more than a fortnight ago with the leaders’ summit. The organizers from Brazil promised with early sunny optimism that it would conclude as scheduled, but as the discussions progressed, the confusion and clear disagreements among delegations grew, and the process looked close to collapse by the end of the week. Late-night talks on Friday, though, and compromise on all sides resulted in a agreement could be agreed on Saturday. The summit produced outcomes on dozens of issues, such as a promise to triple adaptation funding to safeguard populations against environmental effects, an accord for a just transition mechanism (JTM), and acknowledgment of the rights of Indigenous people.

However proposals to begin developing roadmaps to shift from fossil fuels and end deforestation were not agreed, and were hived off to processes outside the UN to be pushed forward by coalitions of willing nations. The effects of the food system – such as cattle in deforested areas in the rainforest – were largely ignored.

Feedback and Concerns

The final agreement was generally viewed as minimal progress in the best case, and far less than needed to address the accelerating climate crisis. “The summit started with a bang of ambition but ended with a sense of letdown,” said a representative from the environmental organization. “This was the moment to transition from talks to action – and it was missed.”

The head of the United Nations, António Guterres, stated advances were achieved, but cautioned it was increasingly challenging to reach consensus. “Climate conferences are consensus-based – and in a time of geopolitical divides, unanimity is increasingly difficult to achieve. It would be dishonest to claim that Cop30 has provided all that is needed. The gap from where we are and scientific requirements is still alarmingly large.”

The European Union's representative for the climate, Wopke Hoekstra, echoed the sense of satisfaction. “The outcome is imperfect, but it is a huge step in the right direction. The EU remained cohesive, advocating for ambition on climate action,” he remarked, even though that unity was sorely tested.

Merely achieving a pact was positive, noted an analyst from a policy institute. “A summit failure would have been a big and damaging setback at the close of a period already marked by serious challenges for international climate cooperation and multilateralism in general. It is encouraging that a deal was concluded in Belém, even if many will – legitimately – be disappointed with the level of ambition.”

But there was also significant discontent that, while adaptation finance had been promised, the target date had been pushed back to the year 2035. Mamadou Ndong Toure from a development organization in Senegal, said: “Adaptation cannot be built on reduced pledges; communities on the frontline require predictable, responsible assistance and a definite plan to act.”

Indigenous Rights and Energy Controversies

In a comparable vein, while Brazil styled Cop30 as the “Indigenous Cop” and the deal acknowledged for the initial occasion Indigenous people’s land rights and wisdom as a fundamental environmental answer, there were nonetheless worries that participation was limited. “Despite being called as an inclusive summit … it became clear that native groups continue to be excluded from the discussions,” said a representative of the indigenous community of Sarayaku.

And there was frustration that the concluding document had avoided explicit mention to fossil fuels. a climate expert from the an academic institution, noted: “Despite the organizers' best efforts, the conference failed to persuade countries to consent to ending fossil fuel use. This regrettable result is the consequence of short-sighted agendas and opportunistic maneuvering.”

Protests and Prospects Ahead

After a number of years of these yearly international environmental conferences hosted by authoritarian-led countries, there were bursts of vibrant demonstrations in Belem as activist groups came back strongly. A large protest with many thousands of demonstrators energized the midpoint of the summit and advocates expressed their views in an otherwise dull, formal Belém conference centre.

“Beginning with protests by native groups on site to the more than 70,000 people who protested in the streets, there was a palpable sense of momentum that I have not experienced for years,” said Jamie Henn from Fossil Free Media.

Ultimately, noted watchers, a way forward exists. Prof Michael Grubb from University College London, commented: “The damp squib of an outcome from the summit has highlighted that a focus on the negative is fraught with diplomatic hurdles. For the road to Cop31, the focus must be balanced by equal attention to the benefits – the {huge economic potential|