PR | COP30: How long will we let unanimity block us?

The Conference of the Parties (COP) on climate change met in Belém (Brazil) for its 30th session — ten years after the Paris Agreement, which opened a global path to limiting and adapting to climate change, and at a moment when 2024 has been confirmed as the warmest year ever recorded, exceeding 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

This COP took place at a time when climate-mitigation efforts are being scaled back in many countries and regions — beginning with the European Union after the 2024 parliamentary elections, and followed by the United States.
The Union of European Federalists (UEF) wishes to thank President Lula and the Brazilian government for hosting this COP and for maintaining high expectations with the launch of the Tropical Forest Forever fund, the guiding principle of muritão (shared effort), and the roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels.

Together with many other NGOs, we observe increasing fatigue with a COP system that relies on unanimity. In the early years — and this was key to achieving the Paris Agreement ten years ago — all parties were eager to participate and build consensus. Today, some countries disengage while others openly block discussions. As a result, reaching agreements within this UN framework has become extremely difficult, and the level of ambition remains insufficient to meet the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

In Europe, the notion of a “coalition of the willing” is gaining traction. Perhaps it is time to rethink the negotiation format to allow groups of states to agree on more impactful and binding climate-mitigation policies.

Domenec Devesa, President of UEF, recalls that “we need a more democratic decision-making system at the global level. The fight against climate change is a clear example. We participated in the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, along with the rest of civil society, and even then the questions of decision-making and binding rules were already on the table. In a few years, it will be too late to establish effective global cooperation.”

Environmental protection: a clear example of the need for a federal Europe

• Lack of unified representation to speak with one voice.
The European Union agreed on its nationally determined contribution only the day before the start of the Conference in Belém — preserving appearances while reducing ambition. Unlike in the World Trade Organization, both the EU and its Member States are individually represented at COP negotiations, creating institutional confusion over who decides and who is accountable.

• Dependence on foreign imports and lack of energy security.
While the Commission, Parliament and Council debate simplification, deregulation or postponement of climate decisions, China continues its decarbonisation and leads the renewable-energy sector. The EU remains dependent on external energy sources (including LNG from Russia and the US, and still oil), raw materials, and key technologies.

• Lack of diplomatic capacity to build alternative partnerships.
Without an autonomous EU diplomacy, Europe struggles to forge new alliances based on win-win cooperation, integrating development, trade, innovation and climate policies into a coherent strategic approach.

• Lack of own resources to ensure social justice.
The ecological transition requires massive investment to support people throughout this transformation. Without genuine own resources, the EU lacks the capacity to act as an investment power. As discussions on the next Multiannual Financial Framework take place, this issue must be addressed.

All these factors prevent the EU from being a true leader on environmental issues — despite its ambitious European Green Deal. A federal approach is still needed for a sovereign, capable European Union with a global vision for this cross-sector policy area: the protection of the environment.