The UN climate summit failed to deliver a roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels, leaving the EU increasingly isolated. COP30 in Belém ended with a final text that avoided any clear plan, drawing criticism that called it an empty deal and a moral failure. The United States withdrew from international climate negotiations, creating both a political and financial vacuum, while President Donald Trump dismissed climate change as a “con job.” Countries that rely heavily on fossil-fuel revenues, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, openly opposed any targets for reducing fossil fuel dependence.
One day before the summit concluded, the EU threatened to reject the agreement, which required consensus from nearly 200 nations. In the end, EU leaders endorsed the final text, recognizing its lack of ambition but seeing no alternative. Despite the outcome, the EU’s 27 members reaffirmed their commitment to the 1.5°C limit and promised to continue reducing pollution and global warming. They pledged to accelerate the transition from fossil fuels at home and to support clean-energy projects abroad. European Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra stated that the EU acted as a united front and fought for stronger global climate ambition.
Divisions Among Global Partners
Dutch MEP Mohammed Chahim said President Lula set high expectations, and the EU arrived ready to lead a coalition of ambitious countries. He warned that fragmentation in the international system hampered global cooperation and slowed progress. Resistance from oil-producing states proved too strong, and shifting geopolitical balances weakened efforts to establish a fossil-fuel exit strategy.
Chahim explained that the EU and the United Kingdom had to work against the tide, while BRICS countries resisted decisive action. BRICS, a coalition of ten emerging economies led by Moscow, positioned itself as a counterweight to Western influence. Irish Minister Darragh O’Brien admitted that he reluctantly supported the final text and regretted the lack of a credible roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels. Over 80 countries, including Ireland, had called for such a plan during COP30, but negotiators refused. Former US Vice President Al Gore criticized petrostates for blocking progress but highlighted that Brazil would still work to develop a global roadmap with support from committed nations.
Scientists and Advocates Warn of Urgency
Climate experts and environmental advocates also criticized the summit outcome. Nikki Reisch from the Centre for International Environmental Law described the agreement as “empty” and said it ignored repeated legal and scientific calls to phase out fossil fuels and hold polluters accountable. She argued that major polluters stalled progress, withheld funds, and pointed fingers while the world continued to face climate disasters.
Doug Weir of the Conflict and Environment Observatory called the final text a moral failure for communities already suffering the worst impacts of climate change. He noted that negotiators made no progress since COP28 in Dubai and now faced an even tougher challenge. A report from Climate Analytics suggested that implementing COP28 pledges fully could reduce warming by a third within ten years. Governments could cut warming rates by half by 2040 if they tripled renewable energy, doubled energy efficiency, and acted on methane emissions. Climate Analytics CEO Bill Hare emphasized that these measures could keep warming below 2°C instead of the projected 2.6°C.
World leaders gathered in Belém to review global progress toward the 1.5°C goal, ten years after the Paris Agreement. The summit concluded after two weeks of negotiations in the Amazonian city, and Australia and Turkey will host upcoming COP meetings to rebuild international momentum.
