🔗 Share this article

While dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, representatives remained confined in a airless conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in tense discussions, with scores ministers representing 17 groups of countries from the least developed nations to the wealthiest economies.

Patience wore thin, the air stifling as exhausted delegates confronted the sobering reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations teetered on the brink of total collapse.

The central impasse: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for well over a century, the carbon dioxide produced by utilizing fossil fuels is increasing temperatures on our planet to alarming levels.

Nevertheless, during over three decades of yearly climate meetings, the crucial requirement to halt fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a resolution made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "move beyond fossil fuels". Officials from the Gulf states, Russia, and multiple other countries were resolved this would not happen again.

Mounting support for change

Meanwhile, a increasing coalition of countries were similarly resolved that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had created a proposal that was gathering growing support and made it evident they were willing to stand their ground.

Emerging economies urgently needed to advance on securing financial assistance to help them address the growing impacts of climate disasters.

Turning point

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were ready to walk out and force a collapse. "We were close for us," remarked one government representative. "I was prepared to walk away."

The critical development happened through negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, principal delegates split from the main group to hold a private conversation with the lead Saudi negotiator. They pressed wording that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to "move beyond fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

Instead of explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". After consideration, the Saudi delegation surprisingly approved the wording.

Delegates collapsed into relief. Cheers erupted. The agreement was done.

With what became known as the "Brazil agreement", the world took a modest advance towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a hesitant, inadequate step that will scarcely affect the climate's continued progression towards disaster. But nevertheless a significant departure from complete stagnation.

Important aspects of the agreement

• In addition to the subtle acknowledgment in the legally agreed text, countries will commence creating a plan to gradually eliminate fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will deliver findings 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 threefold increase to $120bn of yearly funding to help them manage the impacts of climate disasters
• This amount will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in high-carbon industries shift to the sustainable sector

Mixed reactions

While our planet teeters on the brink of climate "tipping points" that could devastate environments and force whole regions into crisis, the agreement was insufficient as the "giant leap" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the proper course, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has fallen short of the occasion," warned one climate expert.

This limited deal might have been the best attainable, given the international tensions – including a US president who avoided the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the rising tide of nationalist politics, persistent fighting in various areas, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic instability.

"The climate arsonists – the fossil fuel giants – were at last in the crosshairs at Cop30," notes one environmental advocate. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The platform is accessible. Now we must transform it into a genuine solution to a protected environment."

Deep fissures revealed

While nations were able to applaud the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also exposed significant divisions in the only global process for confronting the climate crisis.

"International summits are agreement-dependent, and in a time of global disagreements, consensus is ever harder to reach," observed one international diplomat. "We should not suggest that this summit has provided all that is needed. The difference between present circumstances and what science demands remains alarmingly large."

Should the world is to avoid the gravest consequences of climate breakdown, the UN climate talks alone will fall far short.