India, Nov. 25 -- For too long, climate negotiations have risked drifting into abstraction, detached from the reality of climate impacts and action already happening on the ground. Often, climate negotiations are reduced to a false binary - from fossil fuels today to clean energy overnight. But real transitions unfold through hard development choices. COP30 in Brazil was a reset - the real world finally re-entered the negotiating halls. At a time when climate multilateralism is under pressure, getting a good deal mattered more than holding out for an ideal one. This is the paradox at the heart of every Conference: Each COP is part of a longer process, yet each COP seeks a strong outcome. If the process from one COP to the next does not retain trust, it becomes harder to secure outcomes at the next one. We came to COP30 in Brazil with clear priorities. The Global Goal on Adaptation was central. Countries debated how to track progress on adaptation - from protecting people and infrastructure against extreme weather to strengthening food systems and water security. But developing countries were concerned that too many indicators would overload already overstretched reporting systems. The final text gives countries the flexibility to select and report on indicators that reflect their national circumstances. Negotiators also took up the "just transition" agenda, ensuring cleaner growth doesn't leave workers and communities behind. This year's negotiations aimed to clarify the scope of the Just Transition Work Programme. The final text's recognition of multiple national pathways to transition - and its decision to develop a Just Transition Mechanism - is good because countries start from very different economic realities. Then there was the roadmap from the $300 billion in climate finance promised last year to $1.3 trillion, which is needed as annual external climate finance. Among other things, this requires reform of multilateral development banks, alleviation of onerous sovereign debt burdens, fairer credit rating assessments and enabling investment environments in developing countries. Those actions and reforms are not within the COP process. But if these don't occur, the roadmap to a transition becomes moot. Each of these issues - and the progress made - is, therefore, contingent on something more. Delivery. That's why COP30 became as much about how decisions would be delivered as it was about the accepted agenda items. That's what made it a "COP of implementation". The first issue with delivery is money. Ambition cannot be scaled up if money doesn't flow. Many blocs (such as the Least Developed Countries, Arab Group, and African Group of Negotiators) wanted discussions on the Global Goal on Adaptation to include multiples of scaled-up adaptation finance. An important win was the final text calling for at least tripling adaptation finance (even though by 2035, instead of the desired 2030), or about $120 billion. The second issue was to give some credible signals on financial contributions from developed countries. A move from $300 billion to $1.3 trillion is only possible when we can first reach $300 billion. Developing countries rightly want to hold developed countries to their promises, but developed nations insist that this discussion fits only within the broader New Collective Quantified Goal. This overall fuzziness was resolved with a decision to establish a two-year work programme on climate finance, including on Article 9.1 (on what rich countries must provide) in the context of Article 9 as a whole. The most difficult issue, carrying over into tense final hours, was a surprise proposal on a "roadmap for transitioning away from fossil fuels". Many countries pushed back hard against any top-down imposition of an energy transition roadmap. This would alter the architecture of the Paris Agreement, which allowed countries to chart their own nationally determined pathways. If one side rustled together 80-odd countries in support of a roadmap, a similar number on the other side drew a red line. The compromise involved the launch of a Global Implementation Accelerator as a cooperative, facilitative and voluntary initiative - with high-level dialogue next year. In return, the COP president also proposed to establish expert groups that would develop roadmaps to combat deforestation and transition away from fossil fuels. But rightly so, these would not be part of the negotiations. In such situations and amid last-minute chaos in the plenary, consultations must drive consensus. Speaking before ministers in Belem, I outlined a 10-point approach that would explore nuance instead. Developing countries are accelerating towards a cleaner future - often ahead of schedule, even amid the non-delivery of adequate finance or transfer of technology. Research by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) shows that India's current climate policies are already bending the emissions curve - reducing ~four billion tonnes of CO2 emissions between 2020 and 2030. Any conversation about transitions must be grounded in people's lived realities. While it is welcome that the COP30 text reaffirms that measures to combat the climate crisis - including unilateral ones - must not result in arbitrary discrimination, we must go further. Without these building blocks, any transition will be desirable rhetoric, but not grounded in reality. The developing world is injecting real-world clarity and solutions into a debate long stuck in abstraction, reminding us that delivery is the only currency of trust. We must judge COPs the way company boards judge annual performance - not on plans, but on delivery. India has expressed interest in hosting COP33 in 2028. Over the next three years, it must ground the debate in climate science, shift the focus on the formula of delivery ("how" not just "what"), not let climate deniers slow down the momentum, and build a new narrative of cooperation that can bridge divides (including among developing countries). It must keep pushing for investment that materialises, adaptation that protects people, recognition of the scale of climate-driven loss and damage, and adequate finance that reaches those who need it. COP30 has shown that multilateralism can still work when there is respect for alternative views and a willingness to compromise. Climate action can accelerate once we recognise that the world is non-binary....