🔗 Share this article

When dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, negotiators remained confined in a airless conference room, oblivious whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in difficult discussions, with dozens ministers representing multiple blocs of countries from the most vulnerable nations to the most developed economies.

Patience wore thin, the air thick as weary delegates confronted the sobering reality: they would not reach a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations hovered near the brink of abject failure.

The major obstacle: Fossil fuels

Scientific evidence has shown for nearly a century, the carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels is warming our planet to critical levels.

Nevertheless, during over three decades of annual climate meetings, the essential necessity to halt fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a agreement made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "move beyond fossil fuels". Delegates from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and several other countries were determined this would not be repeated.

Increasing pressure for change

At the same time, a growing number of countries were similarly resolved that progress on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a proposal that was gathering increasing support and made it evident they were prepared to stand their ground.

Less wealthy nations desperately wanted to make progress on securing financial assistance to help them cope with the growing impacts of climate disasters.

Turning point

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were ready to leave and trigger failure. "The situation was precarious for us," stated one energy minister. "I considered to walk away."

The breakthrough came through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, principal delegates left the main group to hold a confidential discussion with the head Saudi negotiator. They urged wording that would subtly reference the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unexpected agreement

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

Delegates collapsed into relief. Cheers erupted. The deal was finalized.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took a modest advance towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a hesitant, insufficient step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards crisis. But nevertheless a important shift from absolute paralysis.

Important aspects of the agreement

• Alongside the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a plan to systematically reduce fossil fuels
• This will be largely a optional undertaking 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 also put off to next year
• Developing countries achieved a tripling to $120bn of yearly funding to help them adapt to the impacts of climate disasters
• 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 transition to the sustainable sector

Mixed reactions

With global conditions hovers near the brink of climate "irreversible changes" that could devastate environments and plunge whole regions into chaos, the agreement was not the "significant advancement" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the proper course, but given the magnitude of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion," stated one policy director.

This flawed deal might have been the best attainable, given the geopolitical headwinds – including a American leader who ignored the talks and remains wedded to oil and coal, the growing influence of rightwing populism, persistent fighting in different locations, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic instability.

"The climate arsonists – the energy conglomerates – were ultimately in the spotlight at the climate summit," says one climate activist. "This represents progress on that. The political space is open. Now we must transform it into a actual pathway to a safer world."

Major disagreements revealed

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

"UN negotiations are agreement-dependent, and in a time of geopolitical divides, unanimity is ever harder to reach," observed one global leader. "We should not suggest that Cop30 has achieved complete success that is needed. The disparity between present circumstances and what research requires remains dangerously wide."

If the world is to prevent the gravest consequences of climate collapse, the global discussions alone will fall far short.