The deal reached in Belém, Brazil, has landed with a thud for many observers — especially inside the European Union. Two things the EU had pushed hard for are nowhere in the final text: a clear roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels, and tougher emission reduction targets than what countries have already committed to in their national climate plans. Delegates are simply urged to stick with what’s already on the table.
A review by SVT flags another telling gap: the words “oil,” “fossil,” “coal,” and “roadmap” do not appear anywhere in the decision document.
The funding target for climate adaptation in developing nations has also shifted. The agreement now calls for tripling funding by 2035 — five years later than earlier drafts had proposed.
Pourmokhtari Highlights the Power Vacuum
Sweden’s Climate Minister, Romina Pourmokhtari, gave a blunt read of the negotiations: “It’s not within the UN framework that we can shape policies aligned with the Paris Agreement; it’s the EU that leads the charge as the world’s most effective climate movement.”
She pointed to the strong showing of the BRICS nations — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — during talks, saying they appeared to move in lockstep with oil-exporting countries. She acknowledged the agreement does reaffirm earlier climate commitments, but held firm that “another increase in ambition” is still badly needed.
“The absence of leadership from the U.S. has created a power vacuum that BRICS seems to be filling to a much greater extent than the EU,” she said — a dynamic she described as a serious challenge going forward.
The Climate Scientist: “It’s Painful”
Dr. Mikael Karlsson, a climate scientist from Uppsala University and former chairman of the Nature Conservation Association, did not hold back during SVT’s live coverage: “This agreement is nowhere near sufficient to tackle the climate crisis.”
He was particularly critical of the funding shortfalls for countries that need resources to actually cut emissions. “I’m deeply disappointed; it’s painful to sit here, witnessing the inadequacy of political action.”
That said, Karlsson stopped short of writing the whole thing off. Despite its failings, he said, the agreement still represents a step — however small — in the right direction for global climate efforts.
