🔗 Share this article

When dawn illuminated the Amazonian city of Belém on Saturday morning, delegates remained trapped in a enclosed conference room, unaware whether it was day or night. For more than 12 hours in strained discussions, with numerous ministers representing multiple blocs of countries ranging from the least developed nations to the richest economies.

Frustration mounted, the air heavy as exhausted 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 nearly a century, the CO2 emissions produced by consuming fossil fuels is warming our planet to critical levels.

Yet, during more than three decades of regular climate meetings, the crucial requirement to cease fossil fuel use has been addressed only once – in a decision made two years ago at the Dubai climate summit to "transition away from fossil fuels". Delegates from the Arab Group, Russia, and multiple other countries were resolved this would not happen again.

Increasing pressure for change

At the same time, a increasing coalition of countries were just as committed that advancement on this issue was crucially important. They had formulated a initiative that was attracting increasing support and made it evident they were ready to dig in.

Emerging economies urgently needed to move forward on securing funding support to help them cope with the already disastrous impacts of climate disasters.

Turning point

During the night of Saturday, some delegates were willing to withdraw and force a collapse. "The situation was precarious for us," remarked one national delegate. "I considered to walk away."

The critical development happened through talks with Saudi Arabia. Around 6am, key negotiators left the main group to hold a private conversation with the lead Saudi negotiator. They encouraged text that would subtly reference the global commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" made two years earlier in Dubai.

Unanticipated resolution

As opposed to explicitly mentioning fossil fuels, the text would refer to "the Dubai agreement". After consideration, the Saudi delegation unexpectedly accepted the wording.

The room showed visible relief. Celebrations began. The settlement was completed.

With what became known as the "Amazon accord", the world took an incremental move towards the gradual elimination of fossil fuels – a faltering, insufficient step that will minimally impact the climate's continued progression towards catastrophe. But nevertheless a notable change from total inaction.

Major components of the agreement

• Complementing the subtle acknowledgment in the legally agreed text, countries will commence creating a framework to gradually eliminate 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 stay within the 1.5C limit was also put off to next year
• Developing countries secured a tripling to $120bn of yearly funding to help them manage the impacts of climate disasters
• This sum will not be completely provided until 2035
• Workers will benefit from a "fair adjustment program" to help people working in polluting businesses shift to the clean economy

Varied responses

As the world approaches the brink of climate "critical thresholds" that could destroy ecosystems and throw whole regions into chaos, the agreement was not the "significant advancement" needed.

"Negotiators delivered some modest progress in the correct path, but in light of 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 international tensions – including a Washington administration who shunned the talks and remains committed to oil and coal, the rising tide of rightwing populism, continuing wars in various areas, unacceptable degrees of inequality, and global economic volatility.

"The climate arsonists – the oil and gas companies – were ultimately in the focus at the climate summit," notes one policy convener. "We have crossed a threshold on that. The platform is open. Now we must convert it to a genuine solution to a protected environment."

Major disagreements revealed

Although nations were able to welcome the official adoption of the deal, Cop30 also exposed major disagreements in the only global process for addressing the climate crisis.

"International summits are unanimity-required, and in a period of international tensions, consensus is ever harder to reach," observed one global leader. "We should not suggest that these talks has delivered everything that is needed. The gap between where we are and what research requires remains alarmingly large."

When the world is to avert the most severe impacts of climate crisis, the international negotiations alone will not be nearly enough.