🔗 Share this article

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

Frustration mounted, the air heavy as weary delegates confronted the grim reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The 30th UN climate conference faced the brink of complete breakdown.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for nearly a century, the carbon dioxide produced by utilizing fossil fuels is heating up our planet to dangerous levels.

Nevertheless, during over three decades of regular climate meetings, the crucial requirement to stop fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a agreement made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "move beyond fossil fuels". Representatives from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and several other countries were adamant this would not happen again.

Mounting support for change

Simultaneously, a expanding group of countries were just as committed that advancement on this issue was vitally needed. They had formulated a proposal that was gathering expanding support and made it clear they were willing to stand their ground.

Emerging economies urgently needed to move forward on securing financial assistance to help them manage the increasingly severe impacts of extreme weather.

Breaking point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were ready to leave and trigger failure. "The situation was precarious for us," commented one national delegate. "I was prepared to walk away."

The pivotal moment occurred through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, principal delegates separated from the main group to hold a private conversation with the chief Saudi negotiator. They encouraged text that would subtly reference the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

As opposed to explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly approved the wording.

Delegates showed visible relief. Applause rang out. The settlement was completed.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took a modest advance towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a uncertain, limited step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards disaster. But nevertheless a significant departure from total inaction.

Major components of the agreement

• In addition to the indirect reference in the official document, countries will begin work a framework to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a non-binding program led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was similarly postponed to next year
• Developing countries secured a threefold increase to $120bn of yearly funding to help them cope with the impacts of climate disasters
• This sum will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors shift to the renewable industry

Mixed reactions

While our planet teeters on the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could eliminate habitats and throw whole regions into chaos, the agreement was insufficient as the "significant advancement" needed.

"The summit provided some modest progress in the correct path, but given the severity of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," stated one climate expert.

This flawed deal might have been the best attainable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a American leader who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the growing influence of rightwing populism, continuing wars in various areas, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Major polluters – the energy conglomerates – were finally in the spotlight at these negotiations," says one policy convener. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The opportunity is available. Now we must turn it into a real fire escape to a safer world."

Significant divisions revealed

Although nations were able to welcome the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also revealed major disagreements in the only global process for confronting the climate crisis.

"UN negotiations are consensus-based, and in a time of geopolitical divides, unanimity is progressively challenging to reach," observed one international diplomat. "We should not suggest that Cop30 has provided all that is needed. The disparity between our current position and what science demands remains concerningly substantial."

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