'Words Are Not Enough': UN Pact for the Future Must Lead to Action, Climate Groups Say

The world's nations agreed on Sunday to pass the "potentially game-changing" Pact for the Future, drawing praise from climate groups but also warnings that its abstract, generalized reforms must lead to concrete action.

The 56-page United Nations agreement, which deals not just with climate but also such issues as inequality, security, artificial intelligence, and global governance, was passed by consensus at the end of a dramatic weekend summit. It came after nine months of negotiations, with one sticking point being whether a reference to "transitioning away from fossil fuels" would be included—ultimately, it was.

"This a positive signal for the road ahead, but the real work is in implementation and political leaders must now turn this promise into action," Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International's executive director, said in a statement. "Halfway through this critical decade, this pact must actually deliver a future the people want—a safe climate and a future free of fossil fuels."

Romain Ioualalen, global policy manager at Oil Change International, agreed with Christensen's take.

"Today, countries once again put the fight against fossil fuels at the heart of the multilateral response to the climate crisis," Ioualalen said in a statement. "But words are not enough, we need urgent action."

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres made similar remarks to close the weekend summit, which preceded this week's high-level U.N. General Assembly talks.

"We are here to bring multilateralism back from the brink," Guterres said. "Now it is our common destiny to walk through it. That demands not just agreement, but action."

The Associated Pressreported that "the pact's fate was in question until the last moment" and "there was so much suspense that Guterres had three prepared speeches, one for approval, one for rejection, and one if things weren't clear," based on comments from a U.N. spokesperson.

Russia intervened to try to "significantly" water down the agreement, the AP reported. Russia sought to add an amendment that said that "the United Nations and its system shall not intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." It was supported only by a handful of authoritarian regimes, and a 54-country bloc of African nations came out against it, which the AP said was seen as "a blow to Moscow."

The Pact for the Future had been looked upon warily by progressive observers for some time. Friends of the Earth International suggested in a statement earlier this month that it didn't do enough to address the lack of Global South voices in global decision-making, and that the U.N. process was being captured by corporate interests. Gonzalo Berrón of the Transnational Institute said at the time that the pact risked "becoming yet another exercise in maintaining the status quo."

Other critiques also emerged after the agreement was finalized. Annika Silva-Leander of International IDEA wrote that the pact was "critical" but didn't address the "rise of authoritarianism and the global decline in democracy, both of which contribute to global instability."

A preliminary draft of the agreement had failed to include the words "fossil fuels," drawing criticism from observers, but the final version included the one reference to phasing them out.

The specific actions that Ioualalen of Oil Change International called for following the agreement included the adoption of national climate plans—"nationally determined contributions"—that halt fossil fuel expansion and phase out all current production, and the adoption by rich nations of an agreement to send $1 trillion annually in climate finance to the Global South.

"The clock is ticking," Ioualalen said. "It's time to pay up and phase out."

Climate finance will be at the top of the agenda at the COP29 summit in Azerbaijan in November. Advocates were dissatisfied with the progress made at preliminary talks in Bonn, Germany in June.