Introduction
Five Cents Politics follows the negotiations in Yerevan, where governments face a widening gap between their promises to protect nature and what they are on course to deliver. Also ahead: the United Arab Emirates puts Lana Nusseibeh forward to lead the United Nations, and Iran says indirect communication with Washington remains open despite fears of renewed fighting.
The biggest immediate test is at the biodiversity summit
The biggest immediate test is at the biodiversity summit, where governments have until 30 October to turn targets into firmer commitments. At COP17 in Armenia, the first global assessment of progress under the Kunming–Montreal biodiversity framework gives negotiators a mixed picture. Nearly ninety percent of countries have set national targets. But fewer than half of the targets assessed are on track. That distinction matters. Adopting a target is not the same as putting the measures in place to achieve it.
The framework calls for protecting thirty percent of both land and marine areas by 2030. Existing national pledges would cover only about twenty-six percent of land and twelve percent of marine areas. The marine shortfall is especially large, but neither category reaches the agreed ambition. This is the first collective review of implementation. So the central question is no longer simply whether governments endorse the framework. It is whether their national commitments, funding, and delivery plans can close those gaps.
Communities that depend directly on healthy ecosystems have a practical stake in the outcome, as do Indigenous peoples and local communities whose participation forms part of implementation. The financing dispute is about both responsibility and capacity to pay. One position is that the donor base should expand to include countries such as China, India, and Gulf states. The opposing position puts greater responsibility on wealthy countries to provide the support developing states need.
Both approaches address the same shortage of resources, but they distribute the burden differently. For countries seeking conservation finance, that disagreement affects how much support might become available and who would provide it. A funding and pledging event scheduled for 26 October offers an early indication of governments’ willingness to contribute. But an announcement at that event should not be confused with a final summit agreement, or with funding already delivered.
Before the conference closes
Before the conference closes, the important questions are whether commitments become stronger, whether their terms are clear, and whether governments agree on practical steps to improve delivery. Another declaration alone would not resolve the shortfalls identified in the assessment. From negotiations over nature to negotiations over leadership: the United Arab Emirates formally nominated Lana Nusseibeh on 21 October to succeed António Guterres as UN secretary-general.
A minister of state and former ambassador to the UN, she enters with extensive experience of the organisation. Her nomination changes the field after the Security Council’s informal poll on 16 October failed to produce a candidate without opposition from at least one permanent member. It does not establish that those governments will support her.
The campaign also brings scrutiny of the UAE’s alleged support for Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces. The UAE denies supporting factions in Sudan, while UN sanctions monitors have described allegations of Emirati military support for the RSF as credible. Those allegations concern the state’s conduct. They are not a proven finding against Nusseibeh personally.
The next useful signal will be another Council poll, and whether any candidate can overcome permanent-member opposition. Its timing remains unsettled. For now, this is a broader contest, not a resolved succession. Meanwhile, Iran says messages are still reaching the United States through intermediaries, and that diplomacy remains possible.
What it means
Those statements, made as concern grows about renewed regional fighting, are a limited but consequential signal. They indicate that Tehran is publicly keeping a diplomatic option open. They do not establish that formal negotiations have resumed, that Washington accepts a particular proposal, or that an agreement is close. The substance of the messages and Washington’s position remain unclear.
Israel’s election on 27 October and the US midterms on 3 November add political context, but neither date establishes a timetable for military action. For people across the region, and for governments trying to prevent a wider conflict, the distinction is important: indirect communication may preserve an opportunity for diplomacy without demonstrating that the parties are making progress.
In Yerevan, the next test is whether funding and implementation commitments narrow the biodiversity gap. At the UN, a new candidate must still win support in a divided Council. And between Iran and Washington, reported messages remain distinct from confirmed negotiations. Each story has a concrete next step, but none yet amounts to a settled outcome. And with that, you're up to speed in a few minutes.