The recent conflict involving the US, Israel and Iran released over 5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO₂e) within just its first two weeks. Research published by environmental tracking initiatives indicates that, across the initial 24 days, total direct emissions surged to about 7.2 million tCO₂e.
With the single largest source of carbon impact topping 3.6 million tonnes from structural degradation of over 20,000 civilian buildings and homes in Iran, and 2.3 million tonnes emitted by Oil Refinery fires igniting 5.9 million barrels, causing toxic Black Rain, the upcoming UN Climate Summit COP31 on 9 November 2026 in Antalya, Türkiye, has severe headwinds to contend. With little to no accountability for carbon emissions stemming from combat operations, missile testing and munitions manufacturing, the secondary harm to humanity creeps unchecked into the borderless atmosphere well beyond battlefield emissions.
COP31 will be led by an unprecedented dual presidency between Türkiye as the legal host and Australia, as the chair of negotiations, marking a definitive, though precarious shift from merely setting targets to practical enforcement. Zero Waste Action Agenda pushed by Türkiye will run in parallel with discussions on Pacific Ocean-climate targets advanced by Australia. The foremost obstacle is implementing a functional, accessible climate finance framework. Following commitments to triple public and private climate finance for developing nations to $300 billion annually by 2035, the global community remains far from the broader target of $1.3 trillion needed for comprehensive adaptation and progressive mitigation. Vulnerable countries struggle to access available capital due to complex, bureaucratic, institutional procedures, coupled with political machinations. Compounding this is the severe underfunding of the newly launched Fund for Responding to Loss & Damage (FRLD). With global economic instability triggering domestic austerity across developed nations, securing binding, grant-based financing rather than debt-inducing loans will dominate the summit's friction points.
Mitigating Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) remains fundamentally deadlocked by deep economic dependencies on fossil fuels. While international coalitions push for clear deadlines to phase out coal, oil and gas, major fossil-fuel-producing states continue to vigorously resist binding language in the central UN draft resolutions. COP31 occurs amid severe energy volatility and regional conflicts that have driven up fossil fuel reliance under the banner of energy security. Bridging the gap between the immediate economic imperatives of fossil-reliant economies and the urgent need to expand affordable, green electrification continues to bleed through the bandage.
India anchors its climate diplomacy in the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC). Rejecting a uniform ‘one-size-fits-all’ energy transition model, it focuses on protecting domestic socio-economic development fused with safeguarding national energy security. Central to India’s demand is the delivery of affordable climate finance and technology transfer to bridge severe adaptation gaps. This position dovetails with India scaling its domestic non-fossil fuel capacity targets to 60 per cent by 2035. India opposes protectionist, unilateral trade measures like the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). India champions an equitable global climate framework that addresses historical emissions while prioritising poverty eradication and climate justice.
The US occupies a complex, transitional position defined by its impending departure from the international climate framework of the Paris Agreement, as withdrawal takes a full year to process. Meanwhile, China’s climate position focuses heavily on implementation, climate finance and resisting green protectionism. Beijing asserts that global climate governance must shift from negotiating new rules to executing existing pledges under the Paris Agreement. With their growing global influence as the world’s leading political pivot, China plans to fiercely challenge unilateral trade barriers, such as international tariffs on its clean technology and low-carbon products, arguing that protectionism severely undermines global green co-operation.
In contrast, Moscow remains committed to its 2050 energy strategy, opposing any binding commitments to fossil fuel reduction – a consistent position that prioritises economic nationalism and energy security. Ironically, it is this position that endorses the recent diesel pact with the Trump administration, drawing on its massive fossil fuel reserves that continue to heat European winters. At loggerheads with populist climate clamour, Russia advocates for ‘technological neutrality’, arguing that individual nations must maintain absolute freedom to determine their own energy mix. Under this framework, Russia aggressively promotes fossil gas as a clean ‘transition fuel’, while expanding its oil extraction infrastructure, particularly across the melting Arctic shelf.
Ultimately, the success of COP31 hinges on converting the structural friction of its historic hosting model into a unified front. The summit must compel developed countries to deliver on their financial promises, establish aggressive pathways to transition away from fossil fuels and prove that multilateral climate diplomacy can withstand deep geopolitical divisions in highly turbulent times.
The trillion-dollar question is where the rhetoric meets the rubber and the rubber meets the road-choking carbon emissions beyond the curated controls.
The author is an India-born, Silicon Valley-based, world-renowned museologist and emeritus board of directors, International Council of Museums US/Canada and chief advisor, UNEP (Caribbean) on living Climate Museums