The global climate summit COP30 in Belém, Brazil, concluded over the weekend with a deal that conspicuously omitted any reference to a phase-out of fossil fuels, exposing deep rifts among negotiating nations and placing the United States in a newly formed coalition alongside Saudi Arabia and Russia, which analysts describe as an “axis of obstruction” to effective climate action.

For the first time in three decades the United States sent no official delegation to the summit, continuing President Donald Trump’s stance sceptical of climate science.

Meanwhile, the United States, Saudi Arabia and Russia joined forces to block inclusion of the term “fossil fuels” in the final text, undermining efforts by more than eighty countries to secure a roadmap for the rapid phase-out of coal, oil and gas.

Brazilian negotiators released a draft without fossil-fuel language, triggering protests from nations such as Colombia and members of the European Union, which had warned they might block a deal written without a clear commitment away from non-renewable energy.

Though the final agreement includes an aim to triple adaptation finance by 2035, observers noted it made no binding commitments on emissions or fossil‐fuel dependency, leaving the world’s 1.5 °C target in question.

Commentators say the alliance of the United States, Saudi Arabia and Russia reflects an emerging geopolitical grouping defending fossil-fuel interests.

“We have witnessed the creation of a new axis of obstruction,” said one global climate expert, as these three countries coordinated at the summit and in related fora.

By contrast, countries pushing for robust action—largely in the Global North and vulnerable regions—are preparing independent frameworks outside the formal United Nations process.

Despite the summit’s weak headline outcome, there was acknowledgment that progress through other channels continues.

Global investment in renewable energy now outpaces fossil-fuel spending; China, in particular, is scaling exports of clean-energy technology.

Yet the message from Belém was clear: the diplomatic consensus mechanism can be stalled when major producers refuse to budge.

With the next climate conference on the horizon and a separate summit planned on fossil-fuel phase-out, momentum now increasingly lies in coalitions of willing nations rather than universal agreements.

Several observers say the fault line exposed at COP30 may prove decisive—not simply because fossil-fuel interests are entrenched, but because a significant portion of the world’s economy is pivoting regardless, creating the risk of isolation for those maintaining business as usual.

‘‘They may be able to veto diplomatic language, but they can’t veto real-world action,’’ one veteran negotiator remarked.