Brazil to push for corporate, local government climate targets at COP30

FILE PHOTO: COP30 President Ambassador Andre Correa do Lago listens to Simon Stiell, Secretary of UN Climate Change (UNFCCC), during an event in Brasilia, Brazil February 6, 2025. REUTERS/Andressa Anholete/File Photo
BRASILIA - COP30 president Brazil on Friday proposed expanding emissions reduction commitments to include pledges from companies, states, and cities, aiming to bolster global climate efforts following the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.
Brazilian diplomats preparing for the climate summit have been working closely with the U.N. to encourage countries to submit updated targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by September, after many missed the February deadline.
The Paris accord, in which almost all nations agreed to limit warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels, requires countries to submit such targets, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and update them every few years.
In a letter released Friday, COP30 President Ambassador Andre Correa do Lago proposed widening the path for reducing emissions by creating a "global NDC" that would incorporate targets from various actors, not just countries, to transform the Global Stocktake - the process for reviewing Paris Agreement progress.
"Our aim is to bring a new dynamic to global climate action, aligning the efforts made by businesses, civil society and all levels of government in coordinated action," Lago wrote, proposing the term "GDC," or "globally determined contribution," for the expanded initiative.
While Lago did not explicitly frame the initiative as a response to U.S. policy changes, he acknowledged it would allow participation from U.S. companies and local governments that have kept their commitment to help curb climate change despite the Trump administration's formal exit from the Paris Agreement.
"Our action agenda is opening up a lot of space for the U.S. side that wants to participate," Lago said, adding the proposal would also encourage countries with conservative emissions targets to be more ambitious.
The Brazilian diplomat said private sector actors often move faster on climate action than governments, which are vulnerable to complex considerations such as the role of oil companies in spurring economic growth or the costs of transforming electricity grids.
Dan Ioschpe, a Brazilian businessman appointed as COP30's "climate champion," said the initiative would provide clarity for non-state actors to align with Paris Agreement goals.
"Not only in the United States, but in general in countries where the national government is not so involved in the issue, we are seeing governors, mayors, and the private sector extremely involved," Ioschpe said.
COP30, to be hosted in the Amazonian city of Belem in November, marks the 10th anniversary of the Paris accord. REUTERS
Find out more about climate change and how it could affect you on the ST microsite here.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Straits Times

an hour ago

• Straits Times

China offers to be peacemaker in Iran-Israel war, but is unlikely to intervene

China's permanent representative to the UN Fu Cong, addresses during a meeting of the United Nations Security Council, on June 13. PHOTO: REUTERS China offers to be peacemaker in Iran-Israel war, but is unlikely to intervene BEIJING - As the conflict between Israel and Iran stretches beyond a week, China has found itself sidelined in developments that could yet have far-reaching consequences for its interests in the Middle East. While Beijing has offered itself as a peacemaker, it is unlikely to wade into the conflict directly, or to supply arms to Iran, say analysts . This is because it wants to avoid confronting the United States, for which military intervention against Iran remains a real possibility. Chinese President Xi Jinping, in a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on June 19, said China is willing to continue to strengthen communication with all parties and 'play a constructive role in restoring peace in the Middle East'. Hours later, US President Donald Trump effectively gave Iran two weeks to return to the negotiating table to discuss the future of its nuclear programme, by saying he would decide whether the US would attack Iran in that time frame. With Iran seriously weakened by the latest hostilities - its top military commanders have been killed and key nuclear facilities damaged - observers believe the initiative remains with Israel and the US. At stake for China is energy imports. China is the largest buyer of Iranian oil. Iran has also threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, which lies between Iran and Oman and is a major route for oil and gas shipments from the Gulf states to China, including from Saudi Arabia, China's biggest supplier of crude after Russia. Even so, beyond issuing diplomatic statements, China is unlikely to intervene, said analysts. While some have touted China's growing influence in the Middle East, particularly after it brokered a landmark normalisation deal between arch-rivals Saudi Arabia and Iran in 2023, it has little appetite to be embroiled in the region's conflicts. Associate Professor Jonathan Fulton, an expert in China's relations with the Middle East, said China's interests in the Middle East are primarily economic, noting also that it buys much more oil from countries such as Saudi Arabia and Oman than Iran. 'When China looks at Iran, I think they see a partner of limited economic value,' he said. 'They also see a country that, through its proxies or its own aggressive behaviour, has destabilised a lot of the Middle East.' Another major reason for China's inaction is that it does not want to antagonise the US, said Prof Fulton, who is nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a US think tank. 'Much like the logic with Ukraine - if China gives weapons to Russia and Russia uses them to attack Ukraine, this is going to provoke Nato and make China an enemy in the eyes of countries that it wants to have good economic and political relations with,' he added. Chinese officials have repeatedly called for a ceasefire since Israel began a major offensive against Iran on June 12 to cripple Tehran's ability to develop nuclear weapons, seen by Israel as a threat to its security. Since that first salvo, there have been tit-for-tat air strikes between the two countries, an ongoing conflict that could yet lead to the overthrow of the leaders of the Islamic republic. China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi has suggested through phone calls to his counterparts in the Middle East - Iran and Israel, as well as Egypt and Oman which are involved in mediation efforts - that China is willing to coordinate with regional countries for peace. Dr Clemens Chay, a research fellow from the Middle East Institute at the National University of Singapore, said: 'Beyond the perfunctory statements and calls by Chinese officials, it is unlikely Beijing will stick its hand in - certainly not militarily - in the ongoing tit-for-tat strikes between Iran and Israel.' Given that China has energy interests in the region, including in Iranian oil, the logical approach for it would be to call for de-escalation, he said. 'But to deploy its forces will be too much of an ask.' Dr Andrea Ghiselli, a lecturer in international politics at the University of Exeter who focuses on Chinese foreign policy in the Middle East, said Mr Wang's phone calls should be read as a way for China to get a better read of the situation. China is probably seeking to understand how regional powers and countries like Russia are preparing for a possible collapse of the regime in Iran and the consequent emergence of Israel as a regional hegemon, said Dr Ghiselli, who also heads research at the ChinaMed Project of the Torino World Affairs Institute, an Italian think tank. A possible regime change in Iran - which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said could happen, even if his government does not aim to bring it about - would also not likely to be welcomed by China, not least because the next leadership may be less predictable. Dr Gedaliah Afterman of Reichman University in Israel said a quick collapse of the regime or power vacuum would threaten China's investments, infrastructure and strategic access across the region. 'Beijing prefers continuity and predictability, particularly given Iran's current economic dependence on China,' he added. He said the best-case scenario for China is a swift de-escalation that avoids direct US-Iran confrontation, preserves the existing regional order in which Beijing feels increasingly comfortable, and enables it to continue balancing relations with Iran, the Gulf and Israel. 'China may also seek to present itself as playing a role in any renewed nuclear agreement, even if only symbolically, especially if this comes at the expense of US influence in the region,' said Dr Afterman. Lim Min Zhang is China correspondent at The Straits Times. He has an interest in Chinese politics, technology, defence and foreign policies. Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

Straits Times

an hour ago

• Straits Times

US navy eyes options if Iran grips Strait of Hormuz choke point

In meetings at the White House, senior US military officials have raised the need to prepare for the possibility of Iran shutting down the Strait of Hormuz. PHOTO: REUTERS WASHINGTON – Iran retains the naval assets and other capabilities it would need to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, a move that could pin any US Navy ships in the Persian Gulf, US military officials say. In meetings at the White House, senior military officials have raised the need to prepare for that possibility, after Iranian officials threatened to mine the strait if the US joined Israel's attacks on the country. Pentagon officials are considering all the ways Iran could retaliate as President Donald Trump cryptically hints at what he might do, saying on June 19 that he had not made a final decision. In several days of attacks, Israel has targeted Iranian military sites and state-sponsored entities, as well as high-ranking generals. It has destroyed many of Iran's ballistic missiles, though Iran still has hundreds of them, US defence officials said. But Israel has steered clear of Iranian naval assets. So while Iran's ability to respond has been severely damaged, it has a robust navy and maintains operatives across the region, where the US has more than 40,000 troops. Iran also has an array of mines that its navy could lay in the Strait of Hormuz. The narrow 90-mile waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the open ocean is a key shipping route. A quarter of the world's oil and 20 per cent of the world's liquefied natural gas passes through it, so mining the choke point would cause gas prices to soar. It could also isolate US minesweepers in the Persian Gulf on one side of the strait. Two defence officials indicated that the navy was looking to disperse its ships in the gulf so that they would be less vulnerable. A navy official declined to comment, citing operational security. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to speak publicly. Iran has vowed that if attacked by US forces, it would respond forcefully, potentially setting off a cycle of escalation. 'Think about what happened in January 2020 after Trump killed Soleimani and times that by 100,' said senior fellow at the Middle East Institute Brian Katulis . A powerful Iranian general, Qassem Soleimani, was killed in a US drone strike in Baghdad during Mr Trump's first administration. Iran then launched the largest-ever ballistic missile barrage at US bases in Iraq, leaving some 110 troops with traumatic brain injuries and unintentionally hitting a Ukrainian passenger jet, killing all 176 people aboard. 'Iran is strategically weaker but operationally still lethal across the region,' Mr Katulis said, 'and Americans still have troops across that part of the world.' Iran has mined the Strait of Hormuz before, including in 1988 during its war with Iraq, when Iran planted 150 mines in the strait. One of the mines struck a US guided missile frigate, the USS Samuel B. Roberts, nearly sinking it. General Joseph Votel, a former leader of U.S. Central Command, and Vice-Admiral Kevin M. Donegan, a former commander of US naval forces in the Middle East, each said on June 18 that Iran was capable of mining the strait, which they said could bring international pressure on Israel to end its bombing campaign. But such an action would probably invite a major US military response and further damage Iran's already crippled economy, Vice-Admiral Donegan added. 'Mining also hurts Iran; they would lose income from oil they sell to China,' he said. 'Now, though, Iranian leadership is much more concerned with regime survival, which will drive their decisions.' Military officials and analysts said missile and drone attacks remained the biggest retaliatory threat to US bases and facilities in the region. 'These would be shorter-range variants, not what they were launching against Israel,' Vice-Admiral Donegan said. 'That Iranian capability remains intact.' Vice-Admiral Donegan also expressed concerns about the possibility that the Quds Force, a shadowy arm of Iran's military, could attack US troops. 'Our Arab partners have done well over the years to root most of that out of their countries; however, that Quds Force and militia threat still remains in Iraq and to some extent in Syria and Jordan,' he said. Iranian officials are seeking to remind Mr Trump that, weakened or not, they still can still find ways to hurt US troops and interests in the region, said Iran expert and a professor at Johns Hopkins University Vali Nasr . Striking Iran, he said, 'gets into such big unknowns.' He added, 'There are a lot of things that could go wrong.' Much is at stake for Iran if it decides to retaliate. 'Many of Iran's options are the strategic equivalent of a suicide bombing,' said Mr Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'They can do enormous damage to others if they mine the Strait of Hormuz, destroy regional oil facilities and rain a missile barrage against Israel, but they may not survive the blowback.' But Iran can make it hugely expensive and dangerous for the US Navy to have to conduct what would most likely be a weeks-long mine-clearing operation in the Strait of Hormuz, according to one former naval officer who was stationed on a minesweeper in the Persian Gulf. He and other navy officers said that clearing the strait could also put American sailors directly in harm's way. Iran is believed to maintain a variety of naval mines. They include small limpet mines containing just a few pounds of explosives that swimmers place directly on a ship's hull and typically detonate after a set amount of time. Iran also has larger moored mines that float just under the water's surface, releasing 100 pounds of explosive force or more when they come in contact with an unsuspecting ship. More advanced 'bottom' mines sit on the seafloor. They use a combination of sensors – such as magnetic, acoustic, pressure and seismic – to determine when a ship is nearby and explode with hundreds of pounds of explosive force. The Navy has four minesweepers in the Persian Gulf, each with 100 sailors aboard who have been based in Bahrain and are trained to deal with underwater hazards. Should Iran place mines in the Strait of Hormuz or other parts of the Persian Gulf, a small navy contingent in Bahrain called Task Force 56 would respond. Usually led by a senior explosive ordnance disposal officer, the task force would take advantage of technologies like autonomous underwater vehicles that can scan the seafloor with sonar much more quickly than the last time Iranian mines threatened the strait. And while the navy has been experimenting with underwater robots to destroy mines, the task force will still need to deploy small teams of explosive ordnance disposal divers for the time-consuming and dangerous task of approaching each mine underwater and carefully placing charges to destroy it. NYTIMES Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

AsiaOne

2 hours ago

• AsiaOne

Trump disavows spy chief Gabbard's take on Iran's nuclear program, World News

WASHINGTON - US President Donald Trump said on Friday (June 20) that his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was wrong in suggesting there is no evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapon. Trump contested intelligence assessments relayed earlier this year by his spy chief that Tehran was not working on a nuclear weapon when he spoke with reporters at an airport in Morristown, New Jersey. "She's wrong," Trump said. Gabbard testified to Congress in March that the US intelligence community continued to judge that Tehran was not working on a nuclear warhead. Trump's comments came as the president has said he would weigh involvement in the Iran-Israel conflict over the next two weeks. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has justified a week of airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets by saying Tehran was on the verge of having a warhead. Gabbard's office has previously pointed to quotes from the spy chief saying that she and Trump were "on the same page" regarding the status of Iran's nuclear programme. Iran denies developing nuclear weapons, saying its uranium enrichment programme was only for peaceful purposes. A source with access to US intelligence reports told Reuters that the assessment presented by Gabbard had not changed. They said US spy services also judged that it would take up to three years for Iran to build a warhead with which it could hit a target of its choice. Some experts, however, believe it could take Iran a much shorter time to build and deliver an untested crude nuclear device, although there would be no guarantee it would work. [[nid:719150]] Trump has frequently disavowed the findings of US intelligence agencies, which he and his supporters have charged - without providing proof - are part of a "deep state" cabal of US officials opposed to his presidency. The Republican president repeatedly clashed with US spy agencies during his first term, including over an assessment that Moscow worked to sway the 2016 presidential vote in his favour and his acceptance of Russian President Vladimir Putin's denials. Gabbard, a fierce Trump loyalist, has been among the president's backers who have aired such allegations.