Belém could shake up climate diplomacy — can the EU keep up?

A few days before I departed for Belém, I spoke with the excellent Chiara Bussi of Il Sole 24 Ore. Due to space constraints, several of the reflections I shared were omitted. Yet, in light of recent developments in the negotiations, many of those points now appear to reflect the current state of affairs with remarkable accuracy. 

Lula, the trade unionist 

The Brazilian Presidency has accelerated its timetable significantly, publishing initial draft texts for all the key decisions far earlier than is typical in the COP process. As I write in the early morning, a new version of the texts is being edited. With President Lula expected in Belém on the 19th, one senses that the old trade unionist is keen to leave his mark on the trajectory of the negotiations.

“The choice of Belém is anything but accidental,” I noted. “Holding the summit in the heart of the Amazon will force world leaders to confront, quite literally, the devastating consequences of deforestation and the urgent need to safeguard critical ecosystems. There is an undeniable paradox in the political logic that led the Brazilian Presidency to select such a fragile environment — one that also presents major logistical challenges for hosting a COP — a decision largely driven by domestic and electoral considerations.”

Trade, development, and the climate imperative

This is one truth: the effort to reconcile conservation with development depends on trade, industrial growth, and new business models. Loggers, gold diggers, mineral miners, farmers, livestock breeders, and agricultural producers all sell to Western markets. Trade and climate are inexorably linked.

“This is also likely to be the COP at which we witness the rise of alternative models of climate-focused development. Countries including China, Brazil and India are preparing to put forward transition pathways that differ markedly from those traditionally envisaged in the West — yet are no less effective. China’s emissions, for example, have been broadly flat for the past 18 months. These approaches may prove more practical to implement. This paradigm shift has not yet been fully recognised by the international community or the media. The role of these countries will include presenting pragmatic and transferable frameworks through real-world applications. In this vision, the fight against climate change moves from obligation to opportunity, opening up industrial and economic prospects that can be tangibly accessed by local communities.”

The COP system’s limitations

The hard truth for the West is that over more than thirty years of the COP process, change on the ground has been driven above all by the scale and strength of China’s manufacturing capacity, and by its early investments in renewables, batteries and electric vehicles. As I have written repeatedly, climate “success” — if any — has happened largely outside the COP system and its rituals. Even the 2020 climate-neutrality declarations of the major powers were produced outside the COP. By nature, the COP has acted as a notary, not a decision-making forum. This only lays bare the impasse in which the international community has been trapped for more than three decades. Sticking rigidly to procedure and inflexibility will take the EU nowhere.

The EU at a crossroads

“Within this context, the EU will find itself under dual pressure: it must demonstrate leadership by upholding high standards of accountability, while also showing flexibility in recognising and integrating the diverse approaches to ecological transition emerging from the Global South. The success of Belém will ultimately be measured by its ability to forge points of convergence between these differing visions of climate transformation.”

The tensions today echo the past. Ahead of the Copenhagen COP, the EU alienated emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil with politically unrealistic demands — a stance later exposed as absurd in the wake of the diesel emissions scandal. A similar risk now looms, as Western countries may once again overlook the profound shifts reshaping global economic and political power.

As things stand, the EU could find itself isolated. A shrewd move would be to turn the tables, change the dynamic, and offer an autonomous and positive narrative that incorporates the more reasonable demands of the negotiators. Shifting from a paradigm of penalties to one of incentives, without compromising integrity, could prove decisive.

A changing global balance

“The world is changing,” as the historical record shows. “In 1910, Britain accounted for around 25% of global GDP; by 1930, that share had fallen below 15%, while the United States and Germany were gaining ground. The US share of global GDP (in purchasing-power-parity terms) fell from 30% in 2000 to 24% in 2024, while China’s rose from 4% to 19%. With India’s rise, historical dynamics can no longer be viewed as an exclusively Western affair.”

Climate diplomacy in Belém must acknowledge this new reality. Perhaps this was the deeper meaning of Lula’s label for the summit: the COP of the Truth.

illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

Track the real‑world impact behind the sustainability headlines. illuminem’s Data Hub™ offers transparent performance data and climate targets of companies driving the transition.