The climate conference in Belém concluded with a compromise that leaves a sense of incompleteness. Gathered in Brazil, nearly 200 countries that signed the Paris Agreement approved a final text that makes no clear mention of phasing out fossil fuels, despite strong calls from Europeans and several allied states.
The document finalized on Saturday, after a final night of negotiations, praises international cooperation on climate issues and reiterates the consensus from COP28, but only encourages “voluntary” progress on climate action, without explicitly reaffirming the promise to move away from oil, gas, and coal. This wording contrasts sharply with the ambitions of over 80 countries that hoped to see a pathway for reducing fossil fuels included.
While this lack of a strong political signal disappoints advocates for acceleration, the text does meet several demands from developing countries. Notably, it aims to triple funding for adaptation by 2035 compared to the current target of $40 billion per year. For many vulnerable states, this advance is seen as essential for addressing escalating climate risks, which they prioritize over the fossil fuel debate.
The European position, isolated toward the end of negotiations, ultimately converged on accepting the compromise. During a coordination meeting, several officials acknowledged that rejecting the text could lead to a resounding failure for the Brazilian host, with no guarantee of achieving a better outcome. French Minister Monique Barbut emphasized that Europe did not want to appear reluctant to financially support the most vulnerable countries.
In a tense geopolitical context marked by divergent positions between hydrocarbon-producing nations and those heavily reliant on funding, the Brazilian presidency prioritized a minimalist agreement. A proposal to establish a roadmap for the gradual phase-out of fossil fuels, which had been discussed, was ultimately not included, despite public support from President Lula.
Some governments, like China, celebrated a “success in a difficult situation.” Other observers, such as analyst Li Shuo, view it instead as a sign of a slowdown in international climate ambition, bolstered by a less assertive political will than before.
The conference also introduced a new component on climate-related trade, with the launch of a dedicated “dialogue” — a first in the multilateral process. This advancement was particularly followed by China, which challenged border carbon taxation mechanisms.
For Europeans, the challenge was to avoid a diplomatic rupture at a COP symbolically held in the Amazon, one of the regions most vulnerable to climate disruptions. “Those who doubt the effectiveness of cooperation would be pleased to see us fail,” warned the conference president, André Corrêa do Lago, before the text was adopted. Ultimately, a compromise was reached, but it fell well short of the expectations of those hoping for a clear message regarding the future of fossil fuels.