Both ENDS

En
Nl
Search
Blog / 25 November 2025

COP30 shows why dismantling ISDS is essential for real climate action

Standing in Belém during COP30, I felt the weight of the moment. We came to the Amazon hoping for decisive progress on phasing out fossil fuels, yet the final outcome fell far short of the ambition science and justice demand. The agreement brought welcome commitments on adaptation finance and global indicators, but it refused to confront the structural forces that make climate action so difficult.

In my intervention at COP30 I spoke about one of those forces: the system of investor–state dispute settlement. Through ISDS, fossil fuel companies can sue governments for billions when they try to protect forests, regulate emissions or plan a responsible fossil exit. Across the Amazon alone, hundreds of oil and gas projects are still shielded by ISDS clauses. This turns forest protection into a financial risk and creates climate finance in reverse[1].

This is not an abstract legal debate. Communities promised development are instead confronted with polluted water, violated rights and arbitration claims that drain public budgets. I carry their voices with me not as a metaphor, but as a reality shaping every climate negotiation.

ISDS as a Brake on Climate Action

COP30 showed once again that climate policy cannot succeed while outdated investment treaties give corporations the power to punish ambition. No amount of climate finance can compensate for a legal system that undermines public interest decisions before they are even taken. Europe has already recognised this by terminating all intra-EU investment treaties and withdrawing from the Energy Charter Treaty. The lesson is simple: what is signed can be undone.

If we want genuine climate progress, we must align investment governance with climate goals. That means no new treaties with ISDS, coordinated exits from existing ones, stronger public-law mechanisms for resolving disputes, and investment frameworks that support a just transition rather than obstruct it.

Belém reminded me that the climate crisis is also a democracy crisis. The future cannot be guided by treaties written for a world that no longer exists. For climate goals to be credible, governments must reclaim the policy space to protect people and the planet. Yet too often the process absorbs the urgency, producing agreements that gesture toward ambition without confronting the structural obstacles.

The Gap Between Diplomacy and Reality

Indigenous peoples from across the Amazon expressed this clearly. Many arrived at COP30 with the message that they are the solution, but left disappointed. As one representative put it, “There was enormous expectation … but the final agreement didn’t provide the answers that the Amazon asked for, and that the world expected”. [2]. Their frustration reflects the growing divide between climate diplomacy and lived reality.

There are steps forward, the termination of some investment treaties, countries rejecting ISDS, and regions exploring climate-aligned frameworks, but these remain partial, uneven and too slow for a world already at its climate tipping points. The shifts are real, but not yet transformative.

Both ENDS will continue to work with partners who are pushing for the systemic changes the COP process is still unwilling to deliver, from dismantling harmful treaties to building investment governance that protects forests, communities and the climate. The direction of travel is clearer than ever, but the pace must change. COP30 makes one thing unmistakable: we cannot afford to wait for the process to catch up with reality.

 

[1] https://www.bu.edu/gdp/2025/11/10/defunding-the-amazon-mapping-isds-risk-from-the-oil-and-gas-sector-in-amazonian-countries/

[2] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/what-cop30-climate-summit-amazon-delivered-forests-indigenous-people-2025-11-22/

For more information

Read more about this subject