By Abbas Nazil
World leaders have offered sharply different approaches to tackling climate change, with vulnerable Pacific nations demanding a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels while energy-producing countries warn that the transition must protect economic growth, energy security and affordability.
The divisions emerged during the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, where leaders debated how quickly countries should transform their energy systems and who should bear the cost of climate action, adaptation and mounting losses from extreme weather.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for urgent action, saying the world must move towards a future beyond fossil fuels through national transition plans with clear timelines while protecting workers and communities affected by the shift.
For low-lying Pacific island nations, however, the need for faster action is tied directly to their survival as rising seas, flooding and other climate impacts threaten communities and national territories.
The Marshall Islands called for an accelerated transition away from fossil fuels, arguing that continued investment in them is increasingly difficult to justify as the world risks exceeding the 1.5°C temperature limit agreed under the Paris Agreement.
Tuvalu similarly demanded a fast, fair and orderly transition away from fossil fuels, alongside stronger efforts to reduce carbon dioxide and methane emissions.
Other countries adopted a more cautious position, stressing that climate policies should not undermine development or access to affordable energy.
Saudi Arabia argued for transition pathways that maintain energy security, economic development and climate protection without excluding any energy source.
Nigeria also rejected what it described as a false choice between development and climate action, maintaining that the country’s transition towards net-zero emissions by 2060 must support development while expanding renewable energy and clean cooking and using gas as a transitional fuel.
Venezuela warned that an externally imposed energy transition could affect food security, employment, production and access to affordable energy, while Brazil said it would continue exploring oil resources while maintaining its environmental commitments and decarbonisation plans.
Some countries, however, presented climate action as an economic opportunity rather than an economic sacrifice.
The United Kingdom linked renewable energy development to employment, economic growth and industrial renewal, while Lesotho launched a Just Energy Transition Fund aimed at expanding renewable energy, improving energy independence and creating opportunities for young people and women.
Portugal also highlighted renewable energy as a means of reducing dependence on external energy sources, saying more than 70 per cent of its energy production now comes from renewables.
The United States adopted a markedly different position, with President Donald Trump defending expanded fossil fuel production and questioning previous warnings about global warming.
Climate finance also emerged as a major source of disagreement, particularly among developing and climate-vulnerable countries facing repeated disasters.
Nepal said climate-related disasters were threatening development gains by destroying infrastructure and forcing poorer countries to borrow money for reconstruction.
The country called for grant-based climate support and easier access to existing financing mechanisms, warning that vulnerable nations should not spend years navigating complicated procedures to demonstrate their need for assistance.
Seychelles argued that climate finance for mitigation, adaptation, technology transfer and loss and damage should be regarded as obligations rather than charity, while also calling for affordable long-term financing and debt relief.
For small island developing states, the climate crisis has increasingly become an issue of sovereignty and national survival.
The Bahamas stressed that rising seas cannot be stopped through political negotiations and supported measures designed to preserve statehood, national boundaries and maritime rights despite sea-level rise.
Tuvalu and the Marshall Islands similarly called for recognition of the continuity of their sovereignty and maritime zones as their territories face increasing pressure from rising seas.
Several leaders also highlighted practical measures for strengthening international cooperation and turning climate commitments into action.
Nepal proposed a Himalayan Climate Resilience Mechanism involving Nepal, India and China to improve the sharing of satellite information, monitor dangerous glacial lakes, strengthen early-warning systems and coordinate responses to disasters.
France pointed to progress in protecting land and marine areas as evidence that multilateral environmental commitments can produce results.
With COP31 scheduled to take place in Türkiye in November, several governments urged the conference to concentrate less on new promises and more on implementation.
Türkiye said it wanted COP31 to become an “Implementation COP”, while Denmark argued that the world already knows many of the solutions required to address climate change and must now focus on delivering measurable results.
