Democratic victories in the United States midterm elections could offer encouragement at COP31, but are unlikely to deliver an immediate breakthrough while President Donald Trump continues to direct US climate policy, according to Washington-based observers.
To continue reading, subscribe to Eco‑Business.
Access all our exclusive content and archive — with a 7-day free trial. Then just US$5/month. Cancel anytime.
- Exclusive access to training across business and policy topics
- Direct access to industry leaders at Eco-Business events
- A seat among the decision makers shaping the region's sustainable development
Democrats have won control of both chambers of Congress, but their new majorities will take office in January, after COP31. Their victory therefore sends a political signal rather than changing who directs US climate diplomacy during the summit.
Trump has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Agreement for a second time and begun the process of withdrawing from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the treaty underpinning the COP talks. The country will have no official delegation at the negotiations for a second consecutive year.
The results do not change the administration’s position or resolve divisions over climate finance and the transition away from fossil fuels, suggested Clarence Edwards, Executive Director of independent, nonpartisan thinktank E3G US.
“Countries that have sought to avoid friction with the US may feel freer to take firmer positions on issues such as fossil fuel transition language, though we can only speculate on the extent,” Edwards told Eco-Business.
“The President still controls the executive branch, executes foreign policy, and the administration has set its policy toward the COP,” Edwards said.
“
Countries that have sought to avoid friction with the US may feel freer to take firmer positions on issues such as fossil fuel transition language, though we can only speculate on the extent.
Clarence Edwards, Executive Director, E3G US
In Edwards’s view, congressional and subnational representatives attending the summit could nevertheless demonstrate that US engagement on climate extends beyond the federal administration.
“That will no doubt lift the mood and reduce the sense that the US is entirely absent from the discussions,” he added.
Former US Secretary of State and climate envoy John Kerry offered a more optimistic interpretation of the election results while speaking at the Brazilian COP30 presidency’s presentation of its fossil fuel transition roadmap on Tuesday.
“This I promise you is a transition that the world wants,” Kerry said, adding that the midterms showed people had made “climate change and its exigencies a voting issue”.
But Li Shuo, Senior Fellow at nonprofit Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI), offered a more sceptical assessment.
“Countries at the COP have enough uncertainties to deal with. I don’t see how their decisions in Antalya will be shaped by something they can not control and is further down the line,” Li told Eco-Business.
Linking the midterm results to what Washington might do from 2029 involved “a very long and quite speculative chain of thought”, he added.
Li said uncertainty and the current lack of US action were increasingly leading countries and the climate process to plan without relying on Washington.
Former US Secretary of State and climate envoy John Kerry speaks at the Brazilian COP30 presidency’s presentation of its fossil fuel transition roadmap on 10 November. Image: UN Climate Change/ Kiara Worth
Harjeet Singh, strategic advisor to the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative and global convener of the Fill the Fund campaign, said other wealthy countries should not use Washington’s stance to justify their own lack of ambition.
“Global climate leadership cannot remain hostage to the pendulum of American domestic politics,” Singh said.
While the election results could create political space, they would not automatically unlock climate finance, he added.
“The fundamental roadblock on climate finance has never been just one US president – it is the systemic refusal of the US and other wealthy, historical polluters to deliver grant-based funding rather than debt-creating loans.”
Adaptation finance and overshoot top Antalya agenda
The test in Antalya will be whether negotiators can turn political encouragement into agreements on emissions cuts, finance and support for countries navigating the energy transition.
Consultations have begun on the summit’s cover decision – an overarching negotiated text that sets out key political messages and priorities, alongside more detailed decisions on individual issues.
David Waskow, director of the International Climate Initiative at the World Resources Institute (WRI), said the Australia and Türkiye COP31 presidencies would draw on countries’ initial views to produce a document outlining possible elements towards the end of the week. A draft of the cover decision itself is expected early the following week.
Among the priorities emerging from those consultations is how to address an overshoot of the 1.5°C warming threshold, Waskow said. Countries have highlighted emissions reductions, adaptation needs, loss and damage, and the role of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Finance is another prominent concern, particularly calls to triple adaptation finance, which is “very much on the minds of a lot of developing country parties”, said Waskow in a webinar on Tuesday.
At COP30, countries called for efforts to at least triple adaptation finance by 2035. WRI interprets this as roughly US$120 billion annually to help developing countries build resilience to climate impacts, although the agreement does not explicitly specify a baseline.
Negotiators are also discussing a just transition mechanism to help countries coordinate fragmented efforts and access technical support and capacity building, Waskow said. Without embedding fairness in the shift away from fossil fuels, that transition could become more difficult and unequal, he warned.
Talks are focused on the mechanism’s functions, governance and institutional arrangements, including whether a dedicated entity is needed and how it would relate to the UN climate process.
Beyond the negotiating rooms, Brazil’s global roadmap for transitioning away from fossil fuels and the electrification pledge will be key issues at the conference, he added.
Brazil’s global roadmap offers a practical guide for countries to develop transition plans reflecting their circumstances, including their roles as fossil-fuel producers and consumers, according to Nick Robins, Senior Director for Finance and Private Sector at WRI. Ghana and the United Kingdom will co-chair the roadmap track, while a separate track will examine economics and finance.
Robins said the push to transition away from fossil fuels was increasingly driven by economic concerns as well as climate goals. Fossil fuel price shocks and cost of living pressures were making the transition an urgent issue for governments, businesses and households, he said.
Delivering the shift towards electrification presents a related financing challenge, said Nick Wayth, Global Director of WRI’s Polsky Center for the Global Energy Transition. Investment in grids is needed to support growing electricity demand and connect renewable generation, but countries must determine who pays and how to distribute those costs fairly.
“Grids are underinvested, and I think one of the biggest challenges is who pays and how those costs are then allocated,” Wayth said.
.jpg){kind=link}