Review of COP30 in Brazil: a summit marked by the geopolitics of competitive multipolarity.
- CAGG
- Dec 2
- 7 min read
Gonzalo Diéguez, Executive Director. Center for Advocacy and Global Growth (CAGG)
The recent UN climate summit took place in a geopolitical context where several powers—the US, China, the EU, India, and Russia, among other regional actors with complex economic interdependencies—are engaged in a dynamic competition for political, technological, and economic leadership.
In light of today's multipolar landscape, the outcomes of the latest climate summit suggest the potential for significant developments in the near future.
A total of 194 countries have been invited to participate in Brazil, but the most important political leaders are not in attendance.
It seems that the expectations regarding the concrete results of COP 30 are modest. The commitments made at previous conferences to achieve the goal of limiting global warming to +1.5°C, as established in the 2015 Paris Agreement, must be implemented.
The venue selected by Brazilian President Ignacio Lula Da Silva appeared to be a political symbol with a clear message: the city of Belém, located in the heart of the Amazon—often referred to as the green lung of the planet—and during a time when the final details of the European Union-Mercosur trade agreement were being discussed.
This could potentially send a message to the Brazilian political system. It is also mindful of the electoral calendar of Latin America's largest economy. That economy is set to hold presidential elections in October of next year.
The summit's return to a democratic country after the previous editions in Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Azerbaijan was a clear signal of the growing power of mass mobilizations led by indigenous communities. It is heartening to see that these communities are voicing their concerns and speaking out against climate denialism and the socio-environmental challenges faced by native communities.
The COP 30 kitchen: the gap between technical discussions in the green zone and political negotiations in the blue zone
It has been noted that there appears to be a notable difference in tone and dynamics between the technical discussions in the green zone, which are comprised of civil society organizations and international cooperation agencies, and the political negotiations in the blue zone, which are made up of ministers and senior political authorities. This observation has been made during COP 30.
It seems that the energy transition agenda is being driven by the rise of bilateralism among geo-economic powers.
During the first week, representatives from Latin America—Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, and Colombia—and from the European Union—Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, and Spain—worked together to issue an official statement that conveyed a strong political message. UNESCO has expressed its support for this initiative.
It was emphasized that the dissemination of disinformation and the occurrence of attacks against journalists and the scientific community have the potential to significantly compromise the credibility of information related to climate change.
However, the official COP 30 declaration ultimately did not include most of these references. It even directly removed explicit references calling for a significant reduction in dependence on fossil fuels.
The US federal government's absence and the soft power of the oil-producing Arab countries appear to have had a clear deterrent effect. It seems that the first sign of this was when President Donald Trump decided to withdraw the country from a climate change conference for the first time in three decades. A couple of months earlier, during the 80th UN General Assembly, he had referred to climate change as a "hoax."
The summit provided an opportunity for a hundred representatives from US states and local governments to express their concerns regarding Trump's stance. It is interesting to note the striking contrast to American federalism and politics. It is worth noting that California Governor Gavin Newsom, who is considered to be among the leading contenders in the Democratic Party primary, was among the most active critics.
After the final rounds of negotiations, the discussion about abandoning polluting energy sources and financing renewable energies with taxes on fossil fuels (oil, gas, and coal) appears to have lost some steam.
It seems that climate diplomacy may encounter challenges in its efforts to address the complexities of fragmented and fragile multilateralism, particularly in the context of geostrategic imperatives, such as the increasing demand for electricity driven by the pursuit of artificial intelligence.
The common thread in the positions of the EU and Spain: from the EU- CELAC summit in Colombia to COP 30 in Brazil
The programmatic roadmap promoted by the EU, particularly that of Spain, shows a coherent and consistent common thread. This is significant at this stage of the contest between divergent development models.
The EU still leading global climate action, despite the rising tide of conservative and populist political forces in the governing offices of Strasbourg and Brussels.
China is a nation that has undergone significant and rapid transformation. The country has seen notable progress in the area of transport electrification, with two out of every three cars sold being electric. Additionally, there has been a substantial increase in solar infrastructure, which could be indicative of a commitment to renewable energy.
However, these advancements are somewhat overshadowed by the ongoing construction of coal-fired power plants, the dirtiest fossil fuel, both within China's borders and around the world.
Ten days before COP 30, at the IV EU-CELAC Summit in Colombia, 58 countries from the two continents set an important precedent for the climate summit. They called for the strengthening of multilateralism, defended bi-regional trade by avoiding the imposition of arbitrary tariffs, and promoted action against climate change. This position could be seen as a subtle expression of concern regarding official US policy.
European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen was not in attendance, which allowed the participation of Antonio Costa on behalf of the European Council, Spanish President Pedro Sánchez, and Brazilian President Ignacio Lula Da Silva to be the focus of attention. It appears that they established the tenor for the content of the bi-regional summit, almost as a prelude to the institutional positions at COP 30.
At the previous summit, COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, countries took a significant step by for the first time debating the allocation of financial assistance from the rich world to poorer countries, many of which are grappling with the most severe consequences of climate change.
Brazil, the host country of COP30, is committed to promoting the creation of a Multilateral Fund for the preservation and protection of tropical forests. It is anticipated that the corporate sectors and financial markets of the most developed countries will make the main contributions to this fund.
The EU has leading the initiative on this goal, working closely with a group of Latin American and Caribbean countries. It seems that they are working together to support the energy transition agenda. They have the significant support of 80 countries.
Meanwhile, Spain is in a favorable position to highlight its achievements in managing renewable energies. As a strategic leader in the Ibero-American region and a privileged interlocutor of the EU-CELAC bloc, it is poised to contribute to the energy transition agenda at the bi-regional and global levels.
It appears that Europe is still pursuing its regulatory ambitions, but it faces numerous challenges related to political and financial impotence.
Spain is in a relatively advantageous position to establish itself as a role model for developing economies. It has the potential to offer a green and inclusive roadmap for the 33 countries of Latin America and the Caribbean and the other 100 that make up the global South.
Will Spain be able to take advantage of this strategic window of opportunity, or will
foreign policy once again succumb to the rigors of domestic emergencies?
The most recent precedent dates back to the second half of 2023, when Spain's pro tempore presidency of the EU coincided with early general elections. It is unfortunate that this was not a missed opportunity to promote the inclusion of Spanish as one of the official languages of European cooperation governance.
The current state of affairs, marked by increasing polarization, presents significant challenges and may lead to certain illusions being shattered.
What's next: It seems that the geopolitical influence of the Mediterranean and the Pacific is influenced by dual leadership, that of Turkey and Australia.
Next year, COP 31 will take on a new format. Turkish goverment representative will formally chair the COP, while an Australian delegate will lead the official discussions. In this manner, it is understood that Australia will be leading the technical process, while Turkey will be responsible for receiving delegations and heads of state.
It appears that, in addition to this institutional innovation in the organizational format, geoeconomics plays a significant role. After a period of intensive negotiations, Turkey has been selected to assume the formal presidency of COP 31, while Australia has been chosen to oversee the coordination of all thematic negotiation tables as vice-president.
Many civil society activists have expressed a sense of concern that, in the aftermath of COP 30, there is a growing tendency to accept the inevitability of climate change rather than taking proactive steps to mitigate it.
According to recent studies by Bloomberg (2024) and the World Economic Forum (2025), there is a possibility that the physical damage inflicted by global warming could have an impact on the global economy, with an estimated cost of around €1.2 trillion per year.
It appears that there might be a discrepancy between the consistency of the commitments made and the effective capacities of countries to implement them. This gap may be due to a lack of multilateral coordination and competitive regional leadership.
It suggests a considerable challenge in ensuring the political legitimacy of environmental policies.
Some insights on the geopolitical aspects of the #COP30 event in Brazil with Agenda Pública, a prominent Spanish media outlet specializing in public policy analysis.
We would like to express our gratitude to Marc Lopez Plana for the opportunity to share some of the main components facing the political economy of North-South cooperation in promoting the green agenda of reducing fossil fuels and raising awareness of active policies on global warming.
