A stormy meeting of the International Maritime Organization in London ended on Friday with a decision to postpone the work for a year, after Saudi Arabia, supported by Russia, pressed for a halt to the activities.
This means that efforts to establish binding international rules to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from shipping – responsible for about 3% of global emissions – will be frozen for a year. During this time, the United States and other adversaries may try to gain more support to completely block these actions.
The move followed a sustained pressure campaign from the United States, characterized by threats of tariffs and other economic sanctions. It is also a huge failure for the European Union, which failed to push through the measure and some of its member states even abstained from voting.
The White House responded with glee.
— President Trump saved America from the outrageous climate fraud that was devastating our country, and he has long warned others to abandon this destructive program before it is too late. Stopping this disastrous vote is a huge victory for Americans and countries around the world, White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said.
“Great disgrace” and “fake”
However, European Commission Vice-President Teresa Ribera called the delay “a great disgrace.” The EU and Brazil publicly supported the initiative ahead of the COP30 global climate talks that will be held next month in Brazil.
Post by European Commission Vice-President for a Clean, Fair and Competitive Transition, Teresa Ribera on Bsky.appScreen/Bsky.app/@teresaribera.ec.europa.eu / Bsky.app
The proposal, which was to be approved by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the UN agency that regulates global shipping, was intended to encourage countries to switch to cleaner fuels to eliminate carbon emissions from shipping by 2050. Over time, this would increase the financial burden on polluting ships. The fees collected would be used to finance the transition to greener fuels and support developing countries.
The White House has opposed it for months, and Trump himself wrote in a post on Truth Social on Thursday that he was “outraged” by the initiative. “The United States will NOT agree to this global green shipping tax,” he stated.
This comes as the United States becomes increasingly hostile in its approach to climate measures, with Trump calling climate change a “hoax” and calling on other countries to stop investing in renewable energy.
According to Vanuatu's climate minister, Ralph Regenvanu, the United States has put “constant pressure” on other countries to support its position. “It's all bullshit,” the Pacific island nation's minister said during a coffee break before the final vote.
Change of position
A motion to postpone the vote on Friday was passed by just four votes, after several countries that had previously supported the measure, including EU members Greece and Cyprus, chose to abstain.
“The net-zero framework relies on fuels and technologies that are not available on a large scale and introduces tough penalties for not using them, which would drive up costs as companies fight for scarce supplies,” a Greek official said on condition of anonymity. Some of the world's leading shipping companies are based in Greece.
Cypriot officials declined to comment on their vote.
The delay has caused consternation among countries supporting efforts to cut emissions in the fast-growing sector.
“They killed [porozumienie]. The lack of leadership from the EU is driving me crazy,” said one of the discussion participants, who also asked to remain anonymous.
The move has gained support from major fossil fuel producers such as Saudi Arabia and Russia, which have traditionally opposed climate measures aimed at curbing the use of oil, gas and coal. Major shipping countries and several countries with large flag registries also opposed [listy statków zarejestrowanych pod banderą danego państwa]including Singapore and Liberia.
Others changed their position.
China, the world's largest shipbuilder, supported the measure in April but voted to delay it on Friday.
A cargo ship unloads iron ore at the ore terminal in Qingdao Port, Shandong Province, China, September 28, 2025.IMAGO/CFOTO / PAP
The conflict has highlighted differences between countries concerned about the economic impact of the measure and those concerned about the consequences of global warming.
A delegate from Saudi Arabia, whose identity cannot be revealed due to IMO restrictions on sharing information, accused supporters of a carbon price of sowing global divisions. “We are different because we all care about our citizens, our future… and our economies,” he said.
Big disappointment
However, Emma Fenton, senior director of diplomacy at the NGO Opportunity Green [ang. Zielona szansa]she called this result “a devastating accusation of the Member States' lack of courageto stand in solidarity with countries vulnerable to the effects of climate change to achieve a just and equitable maritime transition.
A spokesman for the European Commission called delay 'regrettable' and stressed the EU's commitment to an “ambitious, science-based global framework” to drive international shipping to net zero emissions by 2050.
The spokesman added that Europe “remains an open and credible partner” and is ready to resume talks “under the leadership of the IMO in due course.”
The International Chamber of Shipping, a global trade association representing over 80 percent world merchant fleet, she expressed disappointment with the outcome of the talks.
“The industry needs clarity to make the investments needed to decarbonize the maritime sector,” Thomas A. Kazakos, secretary general of the chamber, said in a statement. “As an industry, we will continue to work with the IMO, which is the best organization to implement the global regulations needed for a global industry.”
Some in the shipping industry fear that if the IMO's efforts fail, the result could be a patchwork of national and regional measures that will be costly and confusing for the sector.
Alison Shaw, IMO manager at environmental NGO Transport & Environment, said the delay would cause further uncertainty for the shipping industry. Nevertheless, this week's deliberations showed “a clear desire to clean up the shipping industry, even in the face of pressure from the United States.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce praised Trump for opposing the measure, which it called “misguided.”
“A unilateral global tax of this nature risks distorting markets and discouraging investment in cleaner shipping technologies,” Marty Durbin, president of Global Energy Institute [ang. Globalnego Instytutu Energii] at the Chamber of Commerce. He also expressed opposition to the way the measure was implemented, calling it a “hasty and opaque process” that many member states did not strongly support.
