It was supposed to be a moment of unity and decisive action for the planet, but instead, the COP30 United Nations climate talks in Belém, Brazil, spiraled into overtime on November 21, 2025, as nations clashed bitterly over the future of fossil fuels. The summit, which drew delegates from nearly every country on Earth, became a battleground of competing interests, high hopes, and, ultimately, deep disappointment for many who expected a strong commitment to phase out oil, gas, and coal—the main culprits behind global warming.
The trouble began when a draft proposal circulated by conference president André Corrêa do Lago failed to even mention fossil fuels, let alone provide a roadmap for phasing them out. According to the Associated Press, this omission infuriated a coalition of 36 countries, including climate-vulnerable island states like Palau, Marshall Islands, and Vanuatu, as well as major European powers such as the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez, a top negotiator for Panama, did not mince words, warning that the decades-long United Nations process risked “becoming a clown show” for failing to address the root cause of the climate crisis.
As the official deadline passed and the talks stretched late into the night, the mood inside the negotiation rooms grew tense. BBC News reported that one negotiator described the scene as “a lot of fighting,” with countries split into rival camps over how strongly the final deal should target fossil fuels. The summit’s cruise ships—temporary hotels for many delegations due to a lack of accommodation in Belém—were set to depart the next day, adding a logistical twist to the diplomatic drama.
Pressure mounted from all sides. Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who had earlier championed a stronger fossil fuel phaseout, joined the chorus for tougher action. According to BBC, he and leaders from more than 80 nations pushed for the summit to commit to faster, more ambitious reductions in fossil fuel use, building on the “transition away from fossil fuels” language agreed at COP28 in Dubai two years earlier. But resistance from oil-producing nations—most notably Saudi Arabia, Russia, and India—proved formidable. French Environment Minister Monique Barbut told the BBC that “oil-producing countries...joined by many emerging countries” were blocking any meaningful mention of fossil fuels. “As it stands now, we have nothing left,” she lamented.
The European Union made its position clear as well. In a closed-door meeting, EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra criticized the draft text for its lack of ambition, saying, “Look at the text. Look at it. None of it is in there. No science. No global stocktake. No transitioning away. But instead, weakness.” He added, “Under no circumstances are we going to accept this. And nothing that is even remotely close, and I say it with pain in my heart, nothing that is remotely close to what is now on the table.”
Meanwhile, activists and civil society groups made their voices heard both inside and outside the conference halls. Demonstrators chanted “fossil fuels out” and hung banners reading “Stop Amazon oil” and “1.5C under threat: time to act,” as captured by BBC and Al Jazeera. Shurabe Mercado, a campaigner with the International Youth Climate Movement, told BBC News, “A good outcome could mean giving us a future and a present that it is worth fighting for. Our generation is most at risk and we are most at stake.”
The frustration wasn’t limited to environmentalists. Amnesty International, in a recent report, warned that the expansion of fossil fuel projects threatens the lives of about two billion people—roughly a quarter of the world’s population. The UN Environment Programme added to the sense of urgency, cautioning just before COP30 that the world is “very likely” to exceed the 1.5-degree Celsius warming limit within the next decade, a threshold set by the Paris Agreement to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate change.
Oxfam International’s climate policy lead, Nafkote Dabi, was blunt in a statement issued on November 21, 2025: “It is unacceptable for any final agreement to exclude a plan to phase out fossil fuels. A roadmap is essential, and it must be just, equitable, and backed by real support for the Global South. Developed countries who grew wealthy on their fossil fuel-based economies must phase out first and fastest, while financing low‑carbon pathways for the Global South.”
For developing nations, the debate over fossil fuels is inseparable from the question of climate finance. Many poorer countries, especially those already suffering from extreme weather events, argued that wealthier nations should shoulder the lion’s share of the financial burden for transitioning to clean energy. As Al Jazeera reported, “Developing countries...have said they want richer nations to shoulder more of the financial burden of tackling the crisis.” Aisha Moriana, head of Pakistan’s delegation, told BBC News, “We need adaptation financing because we are already doing a lot to reduce emissions. Who will pay the cheque? We are looking forward to receiving that money.”
The latest draft deal did little to resolve these concerns. While it called for global efforts to triple climate financing by 2030, it stopped short of specifying whether the funds should come from rich countries or the private sector. This ambiguity sparked anger among poorer nations, who have long criticized the failure of wealthy countries to deliver on past climate finance pledges. The draft also weakened previous language around deforestation, a particularly sensitive issue given the summit’s location on the edge of the Amazon. “The wildlife and indigenous people who call the forest their home deserve better than this,” said Kelly Dent, Director of External Engagement for World Animal Protection, as quoted by BBC.
Complicating matters further, the summit was disrupted by two evacuations. A fire broke out on November 20, 2025, briefly spreading through the conference pavilions and causing 13 cases of smoke inhalation, according to the Associated Press. The incident forced a six-hour closure and cost negotiators a full day of work, leaving the talks running 24 hours behind schedule as of November 21.
Despite the setbacks, delegates pressed on, meeting behind closed doors late into Friday night in search of a breakthrough. The Brazilian presidency tried a new approach, bringing together smaller groups of negotiators in hopes of finding common ground. But as Jennifer Morgan, a veteran observer and former chief German climate negotiator, told the Associated Press, “I would expect there needs to be another text. I think there’s quite a lot of work to be done.”
As the world watched, the fate of the COP30 summit—and perhaps the credibility of the entire UN climate process—hung in the balance. The divisions on display in Belém underscored both the urgency of the climate crisis and the immense political, economic, and social challenges involved in confronting it. Whether the negotiators can bridge their differences and deliver a deal that truly addresses the root causes of global warming remains to be seen. For now, the clock is ticking, and the world waits.
