🔗 Share this article

As dawn was breaking the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, negotiators remained stuck in a enclosed conference room, oblivious whether it was day or night. Having spent 12 hours in strained discussions, with numerous ministers representing multiple blocs of countries from the least developed nations to the most developed economies.

Frustration mounted, the air thick as sweaty delegates faced up to the harsh reality: there would not be a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations faced the brink of complete breakdown.

The sticking point: Fossil fuels

Research has demonstrated for nearly a century, the CO2 emissions produced by utilizing fossil fuels is warming our planet to critical levels.

Nevertheless, during over three decades of yearly climate meetings, the essential necessity to stop fossil fuel use has been referenced only once – in a agreement made two years ago at Cop28 to "transition away from fossil fuels". Representatives from the Gulf states, Russia, and a few other countries were determined this would not occur another time.

Mounting support for change

At the same time, a growing number of countries were equally determined that movement on this issue was crucially important. They had created a proposal that was earning increasing support and made it apparent they were willing to stand their ground.

Less wealthy nations strongly sought to advance on securing economic resources to help them address the increasingly severe impacts of extreme weather.

Critical moment

By the early hours of Saturday, some delegates were willing to leave and trigger failure. "It was on the edge for us," remarked one national delegate. "I was ready to walk away."

The critical development occurred through discussions with Saudi Arabia. Shortly after 6am, key negotiators split from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the lead Saudi negotiator. They urged wording that would obliquely recognise the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

Instead of explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the UAE consensus". Upon deliberation, the Saudi delegation unforeseeably agreed to the wording.

The room showed visible relief. Applause rang out. The agreement was finalized.

With what became known as the "Belém political package", the world took an incremental move towards the systematic reduction of fossil fuels – a faltering, insufficient step that will barely interrupt the climate's continued progression towards disaster. But nevertheless a important shift from total inaction.

Major components of the agreement

• Complementing the indirect reference in the formal agreement, countries will commence creating a framework 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 not exceed the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries achieved a threefold increase to $120bn of yearly funding to help them cope with the impacts of environmental crises
• This funding will not be fully available until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "just transition mechanism" to help people working in high-carbon industries move toward the clean economy

Varied responses

As the world approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could eliminate habitats and plunge whole regions into crisis, the agreement was not 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 climate expert.

This limited deal might have been all that was possible, given the political challenges – including a American leader who ignored the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the rising tide of conservative movements, persistent fighting in different locations, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the fossil fuel giants – were ultimately in the focus at Cop30," notes one environmental advocate. "This represents progress on that. The political space is open. Now we must transform it into a actual pathway to a protected environment."

Significant divisions revealed

Even as nations were able to celebrate the gavelling through of the deal, Cop30 also revealed major disagreements in the primary worldwide framework for addressing the climate crisis.

"Climate conferences are consensus-based, and in a period of geopolitical divides, unanimity is increasingly difficult to reach," observed one international diplomat. "I cannot pretend that Cop30 has provided all that is needed. The disparity between our current position and what evidence necessitates remains concerningly substantial."

If the world is to avoid the worst ravages of climate crisis, the global discussions alone will prove insufficient.