When the news broke that the US might once again withdraw from the Paris Agreement, it landed like a thunderclap over already fragile international climate talks. The announcement sent ripples through diplomatic circles. It was also a talking point at the 28 July closed-door Belém Desk media briefing, a forum where Brazil’s top climate negotiator, leading civil society voices, and global policy experts mapped the perilous road from mid-year talks in Bonn to COP30 in Belém this November.

The sense in the room was unmistakable: this is not just another year in the long series of UN climate summits. It’s a turning point. The 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement arrives at a moment when geopolitical tensions, sluggish emissions cuts, and deep financing gaps threaten to derail climate cooperation. And the US, historically the world’s largest emitter and still a dominant political force, may be stepping away from the table once again.

Yet for some in the room, the potential US exit was not only a setback. It was also a wake-up call.

Fernanda Carvalho, Global Climate and Energy Policy Lead at WWF International, noted that the US withdrawal from COP is often blamed for its outcomes. Success is attributed to the US stepping back, fostering unity among countries, while failure is linked to its absence. She emphasized that issues like multilateralism crises, distrust, and tension predate the US decision and are not solely its fault. Carvalho encouraged focusing on opportunities for new leadership and coalitions instead of just the negatives.

Bonn: A Fragile Progress

The Belém Desk participants, Ambassador Liliam Chagas, Carvalho, and Cintya Feitosa of the Institute for Climate and Society (iCS), were fresh from the June UNFCCC subsidiary body meetings in Bonn, where negotiators struggled to maintain momentum. Compared to last year’s procedural deadlock, the outcome was modest but tangible: most negotiating tracks advanced toward COP30, with only the technology implementation program stalling.

For Chagas, Brazil’s chief climate negotiator, that was evidence that governments still see value in the UN process.

“This is not the time to abandon anything,” she said. “On the contrary, it’s a time to redouble our efforts… Our responsibility as governments is with our societies, and societies are already feeling the heatwaves, floods, droughts, and changes in rainfall patterns that affect food production and food prices.”

Still, Bonn revealed the fault lines. Climate finance, the perennial make-or-break topic, once again dominated discussions. Parties revisited the commitment under Article 9.1 for developed countries to provide funding to developing nations. And they revived the conversation about how to grow climate finance from the current $300 billion target toward the $1.3 trillion per year many believe is needed.

The Many Stories of COP30

In recent years, each COP has had a clear headline: Glasgow (COP26) was about finalizing the Paris “rulebook,” Sharm el‑Sheikh (COP27) was the “loss and damage” COP, and Dubai (COP28) was the fossil fuel “transition away” COP. COP30, Feitosa argued, is different. “This will not be a one-story COP,” she said. “It will be many stories unfolding at once.”

Those stories span:

• Adaptation: Finalizing the global goal on adaptation, with indicators and a plan for financing real-world implementation.
• Just Transition: Broadening the concept beyond energy‑sector workers to encompass economic diversification, new industries, and development pathways.
• Global Stocktake (GST) Implementation: Turning last year’s commitments, including phasing down fossil fuels, into action.
• Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs): Urging countries, especially the G20, to submit stronger climate plans that put the world on track for a 1.5°C limit.

The urgency is clear. The Paris Agreement’s logic is that every five years, countries submit more ambitious climate pledges. The 2025 deadline for the second round of NDCs passed in February. Yet, as of late July, only a handful of G20 countries had submitted new plans.

The numbers tell a sobering story. To have a 50% chance of staying within 1.5°C, the IPCC says global emissions must fall 43% from 2019 levels by 2030. Current pledges point to only a 2.6% drop — effectively locking in a hotter, more dangerous future.

Nature at the Core

For Brazil, nature — especially forests — will be a central theme in Belém. The COP30 host city sits in the heart of the Amazon, the world’s largest tropical forest and a critical carbon sink.

WWF and others are pushing for a dedicated work program under the climate convention to address nature-climate synergies. This would complement initiatives like the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), a proposed finance mechanism backed by Brazil and the World Bank to fund forest conservation at scale.

Chagas stressed that the Amazon is both a national and regional priority. Brazil is coordinating with its Amazonian neighbors under the “United for Our Forest” initiative, and with African nations on shared adaptation and development goals. “We hope our neighbors are committed to the success of the COP in Brazil because it is also a Latin American COP,” she said.

Finance: The Make‑or‑Break Issue

The finance gap looms over every other agenda item. Without trillions in investment, both mitigation and adaptation will stall. And the U.S. withdrawal — if it happens — will only deepen the uncertainty.

Brazil is pushing for a “roadmap from Baku to Belém” to mobilize the $1.3 trillion per year needed. That involves reforming multilateral development banks, lowering the cost of capital for developing countries, and exploring global taxes on aviation and shipping.

For Feitosa, adaptation finance is particularly urgent. “Indicators are important, but without the means to implement them, they’re meaningless,” she said. “Adaptation has always been the poor cousin to mitigation. That has to change.”

A Test Year for the Paris Agreement

COP30 is more than a symbolic anniversary. It’s the first real test of the Paris Agreement’s “ratchet” mechanism — the idea that climate ambition would rise over time. It’s also the year when new transparency rules kick in, requiring countries to file Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs) under a more rigorous format.

Chagas called it a “test year”, one that will determine whether the Agreement can deliver in an era of geopolitical strain. “The sky is the limit,” she said, “but we have to use this negotiating space to make that leap, not settle for superficial decisions.”

The Belém Desk speakers also stressed that COP30 will be more than a formal negotiation. Brazil’s presidency is emphasizing the “Action Agenda” — a platform for solutions from cities, states, Indigenous communities, businesses, and civil society. This year’s theme: implementing the Global Stocktake.

The goal is to showcase and scale real‑world solutions, from financing models to technological innovations to social programs. Chagas described it as a “joint effort against climate change” — a national and global mobilization that must complement the formal negotiations.

The US Factor — and the Need for Resilience

In 2017, when the Trump administration first announced a US withdrawal, it triggered a surge of subnational and corporate action worldwide. Many expect history could repeat itself, but with less optimism about filling the leadership gap.

Feitosa warned against complacency. “We cannot afford to backtrack on any climate action from here forward,” she said. “Civil society and the media will have to play a crucial role in monitoring commitments from non-state actors. They can’t use the United States as an excuse to lower ambition.”

Carvalho agreed, framing the potential US exit as both a challenge and an opening. New alliances — between the EU and China, within BRICS, among Latin American and African nations — are already emerging. These could shape the next phase of climate diplomacy.

The Road to Belém

From now until November, negotiators face an intense sprint. They must close gaps in the text, secure finance commitments, and push major economies to submit ambitious NDCs. They must also navigate a fraught geopolitical landscape — wars, trade disputes, economic instability — that competes for leaders’ attention.

And they must do all this knowing that, even with success in Belém, the world remains far off track for 1.5°C.

“By the end of COP30, if we are still off‑track, civil society expects a global political response,” Carvalho said. “That response must be led, but not solely delivered, by Brazil.”

In Belém, the stakes will be more than diplomatic. They will be about whether the Paris Agreement can survive another decade in a “melting world”, and whether global climate cooperation can outlast even the most powerful nations’ political whims.