File image.
New Delhi: Brazil's proposal to establish a new multilateral body under the UN climate framework has drawn cautious responses from key European countries, even as they acknowledged the need for more effective climate action. The idea, floated informally ahead of COP30, which Brazil will host later this year in Belém suggests forming a “Climate Change Council” under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to accelerate decision-making, improve coordination, and fast-track implementation of climate agreements.
Brazil’s move stems from growing concerns that the existing UN climate process is too slow and bureaucratic to meet the urgency of the climate crisis. Despite the progress made through the Paris Agreement, which has reduced projected warming from nearly 5 degrees Celsius to about 2.7 degrees experts warn that the world is still off course to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees. 2024 marked the first year in which global temperatures remained above 1.5 degrees Celsius for an entire calendar year.
Against this backdrop, Brazil’s proposal was discussed at the Petersberg Climate Dialogue in Berlin last month, where members of a five-member European Union delegation, visiting India recently shared their perspectives.
Germany’s Deputy Special Envoy for International Climate Action, Gerhard Schlaudraff, welcomed Brazil’s initiative to spark dialogue but cautioned against undermining the current UN climate architecture. “There is a general idea that the Brazilians put forward, but everyone in the room agreed that the UNFCCC is, right now, the best system we have, and we should not throw it away,” he said. Schlaudraff stressed that the UNFCCC is a platform for inclusive multilateralism where every country has an equal voice. He added, “Every year, the expectation is that the COPs will solve the climate crisis, and that's not realistic.”
Instead of abandoning the current system, he urged for building on what exists, recognizing both its strengths and limitations. He also acknowledged the difficulty in bridging the gap between what falls inside the UNFCCC framework and what lies outside of it, especially in the implementation phase.
European Union Special Envoy for Climate and Environment, Anthony Agotha, echoed these sentiments, acknowledging the slow pace of UN processes but highlighting their indispensability. “These are UN processes with consensus, and they can be painfully, painfully slow,” he said. “We don’t have a world government, but interestingly enough, we all come together at these COPs and come out with something.”
He reflected on last year’s climate talks in Baku (COP29), saying the outcome “could have been worse” and underscoring the significance of holding the process together, especially in a time when the U.S. had withdrawn from the Paris Agreement. “I like to think that we all have a part in keeping it alive, so I take that as a win,” Agotha said, while admitting that the results still fell short.
Sweden’s Climate Ambassador, Mattias Frumerie, emphasized the importance of improving implementation within the existing structure. “I think all of us see that the UNFCCC process as a whole would need to be more efficient, especially when it comes to implementation,” he noted. With the Paris Agreement and its rulebook already in place, Frumerie said the focus must now be on delivering the commitments made. He added that the EU would work closely with Brazil’s COP presidency to explore how to enhance action within the existing process.
Other EU delegates voiced concern that creating a new climate body might risk fragmenting global climate efforts instead of uniting them. While Brazil’s proposal has opened the door for important discussions on reform, the prevailing sentiment among European envoys is that reform must reinforce, not replace the UNFCCC framework.
With PTI inputs