The COP30 held in Belém, Brazil, from November 10th to 21st, in the heart of the Amazon, left a contradictory outcome that demonstrates the real interests involved, which disregard the scientific indications of environmental collapse – no longer imminent, but underway – and the impact on the entire environmental and productive chain given the surpassing of the points of no return, the first of which we have already passed, days before the start of COP30.

This contradiction is expressed by the timid and merely symbolic visibility given to Indigenous peoples – which, according to Brazil’s Sonia Guajajara, Minister of Indigenous Peoples in the Lula government, represented progress due to their unprecedented presence and influence – and promises that ultimately represented concrete setbacks in terms of climate ambition, resulting from negotiations hampered by geopolitical pressures. These came especially from countries in the Global North that want to perpetuate their economic-extractive interests according to colonial-capitalist logic, represented by agribusiness and actors linked to the defense of fossil fuels. According to Ailton Krenak and Daniel Munduruku, important Indigenous leaders in Brazil, COP30 was a marketplace for bourgeois lobbying, with the sale of carbon credits and without the equal participation of Indigenous peoples in the decisions.

The Brazilian government attempted to place the Amazon and a “just” transition at the center of the agenda, given the region’s crucial role in the global climate balance. However, this led to several contradictions, such as the creation of unprecedented spaces that became targets of criticism, like Agrizone – closed off by agribusiness barons who claimed to seek solutions through “tropical agriculture,” the main culprits behind deforestation in Brazil – as well as the defense of oil exploration at the mouth of the Amazon River, approved by the Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) just days before the start of COP30, and the privatization of the Madeira, Tocantins, and Tapajós rivers through Decree 12.600/2025. Simultaneously, the format and logistics of COP30 reflected clear political choices: In addition to formal sessions, there was a proliferation of business pavilions, parallel events, and financing mechanisms presented as technical solutions, shifting the focus from key political deliberations to the arena of technical negotiation. The massive presence of delegates, companies, and lobbyists transformed part of the COP into a marketplace of influence where instruments such as carbon credits, financing mechanisms, and “bioeconomy” were discussed, the latter losing momentum on the way to the final result.

Despite the promises, the final decisions fell far short of the concrete need to limit global warming to 1.5 °C – the central goal of the Paris Agreement. There was no consensus on a clear strategy for abandoning fossil fuels – an expression that was even contested and later softened in the final text – and central points such as concrete emission reduction targets and an operational plan for the gradual elimination of fossil fuels, which were left aside. Adaptation targets received indicators and mentions, but they need deadlines and binding financial targets, and the goal of tripling funding for adaptation was established in vague terms, without a timetable or guaranteed source. This translates into a rhetorical fallacy that does not consolidate into concrete commitments.

This became evident with the Indigenous pressure for recognition, increasing the public visibility of the agendas and struggles for the defense of their territories. This is directly linked to the climate issue, showing the tensions between the symbolic and ornamental participation of Indigenous peoples and the real power of veto in negotiations and consideration of their knowledge. This led to demonstrations, blockades, and occupation of restricted spaces that evidenced frustration with the lack of transparency and equity in the processes. Thus, the People’s Summit (Cúpula dos Povos), which took place in parallel, acted as a space of resistance, organizing an alternative agenda that demanded democracy in decision-making and socio-environmental justice, disseminating manifestos and strengthening solidarity among peoples, culminating in the Climate March that brought together more than seventy thousand people, among Indigenous people and social movement activists, on November 15th.  The articulation between the streets and the formal negotiations amplified the political pressure, but it was not enough to guarantee substantive changes in the final decisions.

Uncertainty and ambivalence prevailed at the official negotiating tables, while for popular social movements, it was very clear that there can be no climate justice without social justice, that is, without confronting the logic of capital. In this sense, the Colombian Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development, Irene Velez, stood out, vehemently defending the end of fossil fuels and demanding a roadmap for the gradual elimination of oil, coal, and gas, which should be discussed at the “parallel” COP in April 2026 in Santa Marta, Colombia, since the next official COP will be held in Turkey.

In contrast to Brazil, which presents itself abroad, under Lula, as a major climate leader, Colombia took the first historic and inaugural step and became the first country to declare the Amazon, in all its corresponding areas, free of mining and oil, as a reserve of renewable natural resources and protection of biomes, showing that what is necessary is possible.

Capitalist colonial logic is evident in the asymmetries between the responsibilities of the Global North and South, given that the differentiated and combined responsibility of the discourse that places a greater obligation on developed countries has not found a place in practice, as it has often been negotiated as “collaboration,” diluting demands for historical financing and more ambitious emission reductions from the Global North, shaping the results to maintain market privileges and the continuity of the extractive logic of minerals – such as lithium and copper – and other resources, perpetuating the configuration of the territories of the South as sources of raw materials and areas for the externalization of environmental impacts.

During the same week as COP30, these impacts were felt in Brazil’s Rio Grande do Sul, which was devastated by a tornado that destroyed thousands of homes. This demonstrated that climate collapse is already a reality and has already claimed thousands of lives, but unfortunately, it does not sensitize those who occupy positions of power and decision-making. In the week following the end of COP30, the Brazilian National Congress overturned the government’s vetoes of the Environmental Licensing Law (15.190/2005), thus weakening environmental protection mechanisms and threatening Indigenous and quilombola [founded by escaped enslaved people – eds.] territories. It is now moving towards approving the Constitutional Amendment Project (PEC) on the Temporal Framework – approved by the Senate on December 9th – which establishes definitive timeframes for territorial claims, possession, or disputes over lands on the date of the promulgation of the 1988 Constitution. This rule contradicts the understanding of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and exposes a colonial-capitalist wound in our history, as it signifies the denial of Indigenous peoples as the original inhabitants of this land, in favor of spurious interests. This shows us that in order to advance the fight for the end of fossil fuels, for climate justice, and to overcome the environmental and historical crossroads we are reaching, we need to defossilize minds.