By Abbas Nazil
The UN has warned that the world is not winning the climate battle, but a fragile agreement secured at COP30 in Belém, Brazil, shows that nations are still committed to climate cooperation despite fierce political divisions and stalled ambitions.
Countries failed to agree on phasing out fossil fuels and could not deliver a long-anticipated roadmap to end deforestation, even though the summit was held in the heart of the Amazon.
Strong resistance from Saudi Arabia and other nations blocked attempts to initiate a formal global transition away from fossil fuels, while discussions on deforestation were pushed outside the UN process into voluntary coalitions.
Despite these setbacks, the conference did not collapse, a fear widely expressed due to rising nationalism, global conflicts and eroding trust in multilateral institutions.
UN climate chief Simon Stiell said the negotiations took place in “stormy political waters”, but COP30 still demonstrated that climate cooperation “is alive and kicking”.
Stiell noted that while the United States under Donald Trump sent no delegation and continued dismissing climate science, 194 countries maintained unity and backed the need for collective climate action.
The final agreement states that the global shift toward low-emission, climate-resilient development is “irreversible”, signalling to markets and governments that clean energy expansion remains the direction of the future.
But the deal’s ambition remains far below scientific requirements, with experts warning that the gap between current global commitments and what is needed to avoid catastrophic heating remains dangerously wide.
Negotiators eventually reached an agreement after overnight talks, approving measures such as tripling global adaptation funding, creating a just transition mechanism and formally recognising Indigenous land rights and knowledge as essential climate solutions.
However, adaptation funding deadlines were pushed to 2035, prompting frustration from climate-vulnerable countries demanding predictable and accountable support.
Civil society groups also criticised the final text for omitting any reference to fossil fuels, calling it a failure of political courage in the face of worsening climate impacts.
Environmental organisations described the summit’s outcome as a “whimper of disappointment”, saying COP30 missed the moment to shift from negotiation to full-scale implementation.
Indigenous groups expressed concern that despite Brazil labelling the summit as the “Indigenous COP”, participation in core negotiations remained limited.
Meanwhile, after years of summits hosted in authoritarian countries with restricted activism, vibrant protests returned, with more than 70,000 people marching in Belém and activists staging colourful demonstrations inside the venue.
Observers concluded that while COP30 delivered no breakthrough, it kept the path forward intact.
Experts stressed that future talks must balance politically difficult fossil fuel phase-out debates with the economic opportunities of fast-tracking renewable energy and helping countries benefit from electrification.
They emphasised that avoiding collapse at COP30, despite deep tensions, was itself a sign that multilateral climate action—though weakened—remains alive.
