🔗 Share this article

When dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained stuck in a enclosed conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in strained discussions, with scores ministers representing multiple blocs of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the richest economies.

Tempers were short, the air thick as exhausted delegates confronted the sobering reality: there would not be a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations faced the brink of abject failure.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

As science has told us for well over a century, the greenhouse gases produced by burning fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to critical levels.

Yet, during nearly three decades of yearly climate meetings, the crucial requirement to halt fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a decision made two years ago at previous UN climate talks to "move beyond fossil fuels". Representatives from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and a few other countries were adamant this would not occur another time.

Increasing pressure for change

Simultaneously, a expanding group of countries were similarly resolved that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had developed a initiative that was earning growing support and made it clear they were prepared to dig in.

Developing countries urgently needed to move forward on securing funding support to help them cope with the already disastrous impacts of extreme weather.

Turning point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to withdraw and cause breakdown. "The situation was precarious for us," stated one government representative. "I was ready to walk away."

The critical development occurred through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, senior representatives separated from the main group to hold a private conversation with the lead Saudi negotiator. They urged text that would subtly reference the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

Rather than explicitly namechecking fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the previous commitment". After consideration, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly approved the wording.

The room expressed relief. Celebrations began. The deal was finalized.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took a modest advance towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a faltering, limited step that will minimally impact the climate's steady march towards disaster. But nevertheless a important shift from total inaction.

Key elements of the agreement

• In addition to the oblique commitment in the official document, countries will commence creating a roadmap to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be largely a non-binding program led by Brazil that will report back 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 tripling to $120bn of regular financial support 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 fossil fuel sectors move toward the sustainable sector

Varied responses

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into disorder, the agreement was far from the "major breakthrough" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the correct path, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion," warned one environmental analyst.

This limited deal might have been all that was possible, given the political challenges – including a Washington administration who avoided the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the rising tide of nationalist politics, ongoing conflicts in various areas, extreme measures of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Fossil fuel corporations – the oil and gas companies – were ultimately in the spotlight at Cop30," comments one climate activist. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The political space is accessible. Now we must turn it into a actual pathway to a more secure planet."

Major disagreements revealed

While nations were able to applaud the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted major disagreements in the sole international mechanism for confronting the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are agreement-dependent, and in a time of global disagreements, unanimity is ever harder to reach," commented one international diplomat. "We should not suggest that Cop30 has delivered everything that is needed. The difference between present circumstances and what evidence necessitates remains dangerously wide."

When the world is to avert the most severe impacts of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will not be nearly enough.