At the UN Climate Summit in New York, leaders sought to build momentum ahead of COP30 in Belém, but the discussions once again highlighted the gap between ambition and delivery. UN Secretary-General António Guterres stressed that national targets and finance commitments still fall short of what science demands, urging governments to move “further and faster” to keep the 1.5 °C target alive.

France reaffirmed its commitments, pledging €7 billion in climate finance, while the EU as a bloc announced €28 billion. Macron also underscored the need to reform multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and IMF to better reflect climate vulnerability, linking institutional change to the effectiveness of climate finance flows. The European Union, meanwhile, reiterated its claim to global climate leadership, but internal divisions were visible as it has yet to agree on a binding 2035 emissions target.

China announced a new climate goal: reducing emissions by 7–10 % below peak levels by 2035, alongside a six-fold expansion of wind and solar relative to 2020 and an increase in non-fossil energy to over 30% of the mix. While significant on paper, China’s position also carried criticism of developed countries for backsliding, particularly the United States. This reflects a persistent geopolitical fault line: emerging economies emphasizing ambition but pointing to unmet commitments from wealthier nations.

More than 120 countries joined the EU in announcing or signalling updated targets, but the credibility of these pledges is weakened by the continued expansion of fossil fuel extraction worldwide. Climate finance remains the central fault line. France and the EU’s announcements, while politically useful, remain modest in the context of the $1.3 trillion per year finance goal under the Baku-to-Belém Roadmap. The question of whether finance pledges are genuinely new, additional, and frontloaded to meet urgent adaptation and resilience needs remains unresolved. The Loss and Damage Fund, too, is still underfunded and politically fragile, underscoring the uncertainty around support for vulnerable nations.

The overall picture is one of renewed signaling but limited structural change. The summit demonstrated that governments are willing to keep climate at the center of political messaging, but the distance between targets and policies is as wide as ever. Macron’s call for reform of global finance institutions suggests recognition that incremental finance pledges cannot bridge systemic gaps. With COP30 on the horizon, the real test will be whether these commitments harden into enforceable national contributions, scaled finance mechanisms, and reforms that genuinely shift the global finance architecture toward climate resilience.