🔗 Share this article

While dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained confined in a windowless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in strained discussions, with scores ministers representing various coalitions of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the most developed economies.

Tempers were short, the air thick as sweaty delegates acknowledged the sobering reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations hovered near the brink of total collapse.

The major obstacle: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for more than a century, the CO2 emissions produced by utilizing fossil fuels is warming our planet to critical levels.

Yet, during over three decades of yearly climate meetings, the essential necessity to halt fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a decision made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "shift from fossil fuels". Officials from the Arab Group, Russia, and a few other countries were adamant this would not happen again.

Mounting support for change

At the same time, a increasing coalition of countries were equally determined that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had created a initiative that was gathering growing support and made it apparent they were prepared to hold firm.

Less wealthy nations strongly sought to make progress on securing financial assistance to help them address the already disastrous impacts of environmental crises.

Critical moment

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were prepared to walk out and trigger failure. "It was on the edge for us," remarked one government representative. "I was prepared to walk away."

The critical development occurred through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, principal delegates split from the main group to hold a private conversation with the head Saudi negotiator. They encouraged text that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to "move beyond fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

As opposed to explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". Following reflection, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably accepted the wording.

The room collapsed into relief. Celebrations began. The settlement was done.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took an incremental move towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a hesitant, limited step that will minimally impact the climate's steady march towards disaster. But nevertheless a important shift from complete stagnation.

Major components of the agreement

• In addition to the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will start developing a framework to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be mostly a non-binding program led by Brazil that will report back next year
• Addressing the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to remain below the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries obtained a tripling to $120bn of regular financial support to help them adapt to the impacts of environmental crises
• This sum will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "equitable change process" to help people working in high-carbon industries move toward the renewable industry

Varied responses

With global conditions approaches the brink of climate "tipping points" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into crisis, the agreement was far from the "giant leap" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the right direction, but given the scale of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," stated one environmental analyst.

This flawed deal might have been the maximum achievable, given the political challenges – including a American leader who shunned the talks and remains aligned with oil and coal, the growing influence of nationalist politics, persistent fighting in multiple regions, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic instability.

"Major polluters – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the spotlight at these negotiations," says one climate activist. "There is no turning back on that. The opportunity is accessible. Now we must convert it to a genuine solution to a safer world."

Deep fissures revealed

Even as nations were able to applaud the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also highlighted significant divisions in the sole international mechanism for tackling the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are consensus-based, and in a time of global disagreements, agreement is progressively challenging to reach," stated one global leader. "We should not suggest that these talks has provided all that is needed. The disparity between our current position and what science demands remains concerningly substantial."

When the world is to avoid the gravest consequences of climate collapse, the UN climate talks alone will prove insufficient.