In Simple Terms
Nearly 200 countries are meeting in Turkey to discuss climate change, even as record heat, disasters, war and fuel shortages make the challenge harder. The United States is not sending an official government team. The key question is whether countries will turn their promises into real steps that protect people and reduce harm.
Negotiations in a Warming World
The 31st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, known as COP31, is taking place in Antalya, Turkey, from November 9 to 20, 2026. Representatives from nearly 200 countries are attending as the climate crisis intersects with conflict, shifting energy markets and disasters that show global warming is no longer a distant threat. The United States, one of the most influential countries in discussions about emissions, is not sending an official government delegation.
The summit follows years of significant diplomatic steps, but countries have yet to settle how to turn their pledges into actual emissions cuts. The Paris Agreement was adopted in 2015, and at a 2023 conference countries pledged to transition away from fossil fuels. But an agreement or declaration alone does not guarantee that policies will change or that the use of coal, oil and gas will fall quickly enough.
Pressure on negotiators is mounting as the world approaches the warming threshold set out in the Paris Agreement: keeping the rise in average global temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius compared with preindustrial levels. The United Nations recently announced that the world will surpass this target. But crossing the threshold does not mean that further efforts are pointless. Experts say every bit of warming that can be avoided will reduce the scale of the damage to come.
Kate Guy, a senior fellow at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy and a former climate diplomacy expert in the Biden administration, describes this as an exceptionally complex moment. Leaders are meeting as energy crises, wars, climate disasters and record temperatures converge. Her assessment underscores that negotiations do not happen in a vacuum: events unfolding around the world can either encourage governments to cooperate or push them to prioritize immediate national interests.
Temperature Records Put Climate Pledges to the Test
Climate measurements offer worrying signs of the direction the planet is heading. October 2026 was the hottest October on record, according to the European Copernicus Climate Change Service. Forecasts suggest that 2026 is likely to rank among the hottest years ever recorded, while 2027 could rival it or be even hotter, with an exceptionally strong El Niño expected.
The World Meteorological Organization expects the four-year period from 2023 to 2026 to be the hottest in recorded history. Copernicus also estimates that the average global temperature in 2026 will almost certainly exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, above preindustrial levels. In recent days, the global average temperature at Earth’s surface has risen more than 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
A temporary crossing of the threshold should not be confused with an official declaration that the Paris Agreement has been breached: a single day’s reading, or even the average for one year, is not enough on its own to establish that. But it is a sign of the broader direction of warming and the widening gap between public ambition and reality. Rachel Cleetus, climate program director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says that decisions made by countries can still affect how far the world overshoots the 1.5-degree threshold and how long it remains above it. Limiting warming matters even if a temporary overshoot cannot be prevented.
Every fraction of a degree has tangible consequences. Higher temperatures increase the risks of heat waves, heavy rainfall and rising sea levels. So the value of climate talks is not limited to reaching a symbolic number; it also lies in reducing the harm to people and their livelihoods. That makes COP31’s success depend on whether countries strengthen climate action—not simply on whether they produce new language at the end of the meetings.
Washington’s Absence Leaves a Political Gap
The United States carries particular weight in climate negotiations. It is responsible for the largest cumulative contribution to carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels, the leading greenhouse gas driving climate change. It is also the world’s second-largest annual emitter, after China. Yet President Donald Trump’s administration will not send an official delegation to COP31.
In January 2026, Trump formally withdrew from the Paris Agreement for a second time, and the United States also withdrew from the body that oversees the agreement. Kelly Sims Gallagher, a professor of energy and environmental policy at Tufts University who served as an energy policy adviser in the Obama administration, says the withdrawal has weakened political momentum in global negotiations. When a country of this size is absent, building consensus becomes harder and questions arise about how durable international commitments really are.
The absence of an official delegation does not mean every American voice will be missing from the city. Representatives of state and local governments, along with U.S. scientists, are expected to attend. They may take part in discussions or share their expertise, but their presence is not equivalent to the federal government representing the country in formal negotiations. The distinction highlights the difference between civic and scientific participation on one hand, and a government’s ability to make commitments on behalf of the nation on the other.
War and Fuel Disruptions Reshape Energy Choices
Another contradiction surrounds the summit: disruption linked to the war with Iran and a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz have cut off important supplies of oil and gas and driven up their costs. In some countries, higher prices have encouraged a shift toward renewable energy. Others have turned back to coal to meet their needs. Pressure in energy markets, then, does not produce the same result everywhere.
These developments show that climate choices are shaped by security concerns, energy supplies and prices, as well as by pledges. Renewable energy can become more attractive when conventional fuels grow more expensive or harder to obtain. But the same supply crisis may push some governments to use coal if it is available. Gallagher says these shifts in private markets form an important backdrop to the talks, even if the war is not a major formal item on the agenda.
Three forces are interacting: international negotiations over emissions, government decisions to secure energy supplies, and the responses of businesses and markets to changing prices. It is therefore not possible to conclude that the war will automatically drive a green transition—or that it will inevitably undermine one. The outcome depends on whether countries invest in cleaner alternatives or respond to immediate pressure by increasing their reliance on coal and other fossil fuels.
Disasters Put Adaptation and Compensation at the Center of Debate
The devastating floods that struck parts of Nepal and Tibet in late August are likely to loom large in discussions in Antalya. A landslide nearby is believed to have triggered the floods, which killed at least 1,455 people. Scientists are still studying how much climate change contributed to the disaster, so a definite causal link should not be claimed. Experts do note, however, that a warmer world makes events such as landslides or the collapse of frozen ground more likely.
The disaster raises questions that go beyond explaining what happened: How should countries prepare for growing climate risks? And who should bear the cost of losses when they occur? Guy says climate change has become an immediate reality that threatens lives and livelihoods, rather than a problem belonging to the distant future. The floods and other recent disasters are therefore expected to shape discussions about adaptation—the preparation communities need for impacts that cannot be fully avoided—as well as the issue of compensation for loss and damage.
The United Nations’ Loss and Damage Fund was established in 2022 to support countries facing a disproportionate burden from climate-related harm. After the floods, Nepal requested funding from the fund. But securing enough resources from the United States and other wealthy countries has remained difficult. The gap between creating an international mechanism and providing the money it needs to deliver meaningful help during disasters is clear.
Fossil Fuel Plans: From Promises to Implementation
At COP28 in 2023, countries pledged to transition away from fossil fuels, but turning that pledge into a detailed shared plan remains contentious. After oil-producing countries, including Saudi Arabia, reportedly resisted the idea at COP30 in Belém, Brazil, in 2025, the parties were unable to agree on a unified plan to carry out the promise.
In response, dozens of countries met independently in April in Santa Marta, Colombia, to develop their own plans for moving away from fossil fuels. Ahead of COP31, Brazil issued a roadmap for phasing out these fuels, drawing in part on those meetings. But publishing a plan, however ambitious, does not guarantee that countries will adopt it or turn it into workable policy.
Cleetus sums up the challenge by distinguishing between reaching an agreement in negotiation halls and taking action at home after a conference ends. Summits can produce ambitious agreements such as the Paris Agreement, but the real test begins when governments return to their capitals and decide which laws, budgets and investments to put in place. The significance of any outcome at COP31 will therefore depend on whether it sets out clear steps and makes it possible to track progress—not just on how forcefully it is worded.
The Bottom Line
COP31 is taking place in Antalya from November 9 to 20, 2026, with nearly 200 countries attending at a moment when record temperatures and disasters are putting governments under pressure. The official U.S. delegation is absent, while war and fuel disruptions are affecting energy choices. These circumstances show how closely the climate crisis is tied to politics, economics and disaster preparedness. From the warming figures to Nepal’s request for support from the Loss and Damage Fund, the message is the same: promises will not reduce risks unless they lead to action and funding. Even if the world temporarily exceeds 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, limiting every further rise in temperature can still reduce the harm.