As the humid air of the Amazon rainforest settles over the city of Belém, Brazil, the world’s gaze has turned to COP30, the United Nations’ annual climate summit, which began on Monday, November 10, 2025. This year, the conference’s 50,000 participants are not gathering in a familiar European capital or a fossil-fuel-rich metropolis, but in the very heart of a region whose fate is inextricably tied to the planet’s future. The Amazon, with its sprawling forests and mighty rivers, is both a symbol of hope and a stark warning—a place where the battle against climate change is waged daily, and where contradictions in global climate policy are laid bare for all to see.
President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was adamant that COP30 be hosted in Belém, despite a dire shortage of hotel rooms and concerns about logistics. “It would be easier to hold the COP in a rich country,” Lula declared back in August. “We want people to see the real situation of the forests, of our rivers, of our people who live there.” According to AFP, his hope is that the Amazon itself will open the eyes of negotiators, observers, businesses, and journalists—many of whom have never experienced the region’s daily reality, where umbrellas shield residents from both searing sun and sudden tropical downpours.
But the Amazon is not just a backdrop for climate talks—it is a central character in the unfolding drama. The rainforest is a vital carbon sink, absorbing greenhouse gases that would otherwise accelerate global warming. Yet it faces relentless threats: deforestation, illegal mining, pollution, drug trafficking, and persistent rights abuses against Indigenous peoples. Scientists warn the Amazon is nearing a dangerous tipping point; rising temperatures and unchecked deforestation could trigger widespread forest dieback, undermining its role as the planet’s lungs.
It’s a contradiction that Brazil, a nation celebrated for its natural wonders and renewable energy, is also one of the world’s top climate polluters, responsible for about 2.5% of global emissions. Since Lula’s return to the presidency in 2022, the country has made notable progress—reversing a recent surge in deforestation and reducing rates by 30% last year, according to DW. Yet, new challenges loom: in 2024 alone, Brazil recorded around 200,000 wildfires, burning an area larger than Belgium and releasing emissions equivalent to Germany’s annual output. Many of these fires are linked to land clearing, but drier and hotter conditions are making them more destructive than ever.
Adding to the controversy, part of the rainforest was cleared to build a large highway to Belém, intended to ease the influx of COP30 traffic. The move has drawn backlash from environmentalists and locals alike. Former US President Donald Trump, absent from the summit, nevertheless took to his social network on November 9 to denounce the tree cutting—ironically, after seeing a segment on Fox News.
Beneath the surface, logistical headaches persist. As of the eve of the conference, many pavilions were still under construction, and organizers voiced concerns about everything from microphone connections to food supplies. “There is great concern about whether everything will be ready on time from a logistical standpoint,” a source close to the UN told AFP. “Connections, microphones, we’re even worried about having enough food.”
Yet, the largest uncertainties are not logistical but political. Can the world come together to respond to the latest, catastrophic projections for global warming? The Paris Agreement of 2015 committed nations to limiting global warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels, with efforts to keep it below 1.5°C. But as UN chief Antonio Guterres recently acknowledged, breaching the 1.5°C threshold is now “inevitable”—the best hope is to keep the overshoot as brief as possible. Global temperatures are already 1.4°C above pre-industrial levels, and concentrations of planet-warming CO2 are at record highs.
Rich and developing nations are again at odds over how to bridge the funding gap for countries battered by climate disasters—like Jamaica, devastated in October by one of the most powerful hurricanes in a century, or the Philippines, struck by two deadly typhoons in just two weeks. A group of small island nations is pushing to have the failure to meet the 1.5°C target placed on the official agenda. “1.5° is not just a number, not just a target, but that’s a lifeline,” Manjeet Dhakal, an advisor to the least developed countries bloc at COP, told AFP. “We cannot be a part of any decision where there is a discussion about (how) we can’t achieve 1.5°.”
Meanwhile, Brazil’s own climate policy is under scrutiny. The country has pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 59-67% by 2035 compared to 2005 levels, and nearly 90% of its electricity comes from renewables like hydropower, wind, and solar. But Brazil is also planning to ramp up fossil fuel production, aiming to become the world’s fourth largest oil producer. Lula’s approval of new drilling at the mouth of the Amazon has drawn sharp criticism. According to the Climate Observatory’s Claudio Angelo, this expansion is a “contradiction in Brazilian climate policy.” At COP28 in Dubai in 2023, Brazil joined other nations in agreeing to move away from fossil fuels, but officials argue that rich countries should lead the decarbonization race, as industrialized nations have already profited from fossil fuels. COP30 president Andre Correa do Lago told DW in July that income from exporting these assets could help fund Brazil’s transition away from fossil fuels.
Complicating matters further is a draft law, dubbed the “devastation bill” by activists, which aims to loosen environmental protections for new infrastructure projects. Although Lula vetoed many of its most damaging sections, the fast-tracking provision remains—a move environmental campaigners warn could open the door to more deforestation and displacement of traditional communities.
On the international stage, the absence of major players is palpable. For the first time, the United States—the world’s largest economy and second-biggest greenhouse gas emitter—is not represented at the summit. President Trump, whose climate skepticism is well-known, recently called climate change “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world” in a UN speech and rejected renewable energy: “The entire globalist concept, asking successful industrialized nations to inflict pain on themselves and radically disrupt their entire societies, must be rejected completely and totally.”
Trump’s stance has drawn sharp rebukes. Brazilian President Lula warned of “extremist forces that fabricate fake news and are condemning future generations to life on a planet altered forever by global warming.” Leaders of Chile and Colombia went further, calling Trump a liar and urging others to ignore US efforts to move away from climate action. “The science is very clear. It is very important not to falsify the truth,” Chile’s environment minister Maisa Rojas told the BBC.
Yet, even among those present, unity is elusive. UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer lamented the waning global consensus on climate change. “Today however, sadly that consensus is gone,” he said, though he affirmed the UK’s commitment: “My message is that the UK is all-in.” Still, in a blow to the Brazilian hosts, the UK opted out of its flagship $125 billion fund to support the world’s rainforests, surprising many who expected the UK to be a leading participant. The fund, the Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF), is meant to reward countries for protecting their forests. Brazil has pledged $1 billion, but hopes to raise $25 billion from public sources, mainly developed countries. Rainforests cover just 6% of the world’s land but store billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases and host half the planet’s species.
As Prince William told leaders, “Let us rise to this moment with the clarity that history demands of us. Let us be the generation that turned the tide—not for applause, but for the quiet gratitude of those yet to be born.” The real test over the next two weeks will be whether nations can move beyond rhetoric, overcome contradictions, and take meaningful steps to avert the worst of the climate crisis. The world is watching—and the stakes could hardly be higher.
