By Carol Amancio
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, of the leftist Workers' Party (PT), said at the COP31 climate conference that Brazil has more authority than any other country to speak on climate and the environment. He made the remark on Thursday (Nov. 12) at a meeting with civil society during the 31st UN Climate Change Conference.
“Nobody on planet Earth, no country has more authority than Brazil when it comes to climate and the environmental issue. We arrived here with several roadmaps ready. To show that we are not playing around,” Lula said.
Lula on zero deforestation: a pledge made to 'our conscience'
One of the most striking moments came when Lula spoke about zero deforestation, one of the government's most repeated environmental promises. According to him, the pledge was not made before the world, but “with our conscience.” In practice, the commitment was presented as an internal moral burden, without the formal accountability that Lula demands of other countries.
In the same speech, the president said Brazilians no longer need to attend climate meetings “with heads bowed.” In his view, the country will become more serious about defending the environment, and Brazilians should walk “with heads held high.”
Trump, Macron and the 'rich countries'
Lula also took aim at the world's most powerful nations. He named Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron, Germany, France and Portugal, and said he wants to see them taking part in the conference. According to him, these are precisely the countries that used to “dictate the rules” to Brazil. The remarks put the Brazilian government in open confrontation with powers that have so far driven the global climate agenda.
The TFFF fund: 'We are not begging'
Speaking about the Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF), Lula rejected the idea that the proposal amounts to a handout. “We are not asking for alms,” he said. In his description, the idea is to attract investment from interested countries, with a financial return for those who contribute, while part of the money would go to countries that have forests and can look after them.
The pitch sounds attractive, but it leaves open questions. The fund depends on who agrees to put money in and on a return that, so far, was not detailed at the meeting. Promising profit to others is easy. Delivering it is another matter.
Youth and Indigenous leaders also pressed for action
During the meeting, Marcele Oliveira, the youth representative at COP30 (held in Belém, Brazil, in 2025), called for political priority for climate commitments and for paid participation of young people in carrying out projects. Josi Kaingang, representing Indigenous peoples, asked for an Indigenous presence at the next COPs, the demarcation of Indigenous territories and direct climate financing for Indigenous communities.
She said that “demarcating and protecting Indigenous lands is one of the most efficient measures to contain the climate crisis.” The pressure on the government, in other words, did not come only from the opposition, but also from people on the front line of the forest.
Why it matters: climate talk versus approval at home
Brazil, home to most of the Amazon rainforest, positions itself as a central player in global climate talks, and COP30 was held on its soil in Belém in 2025. That is why Lula's claim of unmatched authority carries weight, and why it invites scrutiny.
At home, the picture is harder. An Atlas poll cited in the source material shows 53.8% of Brazilians disapprove of the president, against 43.7% who approve. A climate-leadership message demands results at home, and that is where the government has faced the most resistance.
What comes next is pressure for concrete targets and real funding. If Brazil wants to be heard as a reference, COP31 will test whether the claim of authority becomes a formal commitment or stays on the campaign stage.
VDD Analysis
Lula may well be right about the forest and about Brazil's importance in the environmental debate. But swapping a formal commitment for “conscience,” and turning criticism of rich countries into a show of authority, is a strategy that demands results. Without clear targets and guaranteed money, the speech sounds more like international marketing than leadership. For those who pay the bill for the rhetoric, what matters is numbers, not sermons.
