🔗 Share this article

As dawn crept over the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, negotiators remained stuck in a windowless conference room, uncertain whether it was day or night. They had been 12 hours in tense discussions, with numerous ministers representing multiple blocs of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the wealthiest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air heavy as weary delegates confronted the harsh reality: they were unlikely to achieve a comprehensive agreement in Brazil. The international climate negotiations hovered near the brink of complete breakdown.

The major obstacle: Fossil fuels

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

Yet, during nearly three decades of annual climate meetings, the essential necessity to halt fossil fuel use has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago at Cop28 to "move beyond fossil fuels". Representatives from the Middle Eastern nations, Russia, and several other countries were determined this would not occur another time.

Mounting support for change

Simultaneously, a increasing coalition of countries were equally determined that advancement on this issue was urgently necessary. They had developed a proposal that was attracting growing support and made it apparent they were ready to stand their ground.

Less wealthy nations urgently needed to move forward on securing economic resources to help them manage the growing impacts of climate disasters.

Turning point

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

The critical development came through talks with Saudi Arabia. Near 6am, principal delegates split from the main group to hold a closed-door meeting with the head Saudi negotiator. They pressed language that would subtly reference the global commitment to "move beyond fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Surprising consensus

Rather than explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". After consideration, the Saudi delegation surprisingly 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 another small step towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a faltering, inadequate step that will barely interrupt the climate's ongoing trajectory towards crisis. But nevertheless a significant departure from total inaction.

Key elements of the agreement

• In addition to the oblique commitment in the formal agreement, countries will start developing a plan to phase out fossil fuels
• This will be primarily a voluntary initiative led by Brazil that will deliver findings next year
• Addressing the essential decreases in greenhouse gas emissions to stay within the 1.5C limit was likewise deferred to next year
• Developing countries secured a tripling to $120bn of regular financial support to help them cope with the impacts of extreme weather
• This sum will not be delivered in full until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "equitable change process" to help people working in fossil fuel sectors shift to the sustainable sector

Differing opinions

As the world teeters on the brink of climate "tipping points" that could devastate environments and force whole regions into crisis, the agreement was far from the "major breakthrough" needed.

"The summit provided some small advances in the right direction, but given the scale of the climate crisis, it has not met the occasion," warned one environmental analyst.

This imperfect deal might have been all that was possible, given the international tensions – including a Washington administration who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the growing influence of conservative movements, persistent fighting in multiple regions, intolerable levels of inequality, and global economic instability.

"The climate arsonists – the energy conglomerates – were at last in the focus at these negotiations," notes one climate activist. "There is no turning back on that. The political space is open. Now we must turn it into a genuine solution to a protected environment."

Major disagreements revealed

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

"UN negotiations are consensus-based, and in a period of global disagreements, consensus is ever harder to reach," commented one international diplomat. "We should not suggest that Cop30 has achieved complete success that is needed. The difference between where we are and what evidence necessitates remains alarmingly large."

Should the world is to avert the worst ravages of climate crisis, the global discussions alone will fall far short.