Tuvalu’s Prime Minister Feleti Teo took to a stage in Apia, Samoa, on Thursday morning to say something pointed. Planned fossil fuel expansions in nations such as Australia represented, for his nation, a “death sentence”. The phrase “death sentence”, Teo said, had not been chosen lightly. He followed up with this: “We will not sit quietly and allow others to determine our fate.”
Teo chose the moment for this broadside well – on the sidelines of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), attended by both King Charles and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. The speech came at the launch of a new report on moves by the “big three” Commonwealth states – the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia – to expand fossil fuel exports.
These three states make up just 6% of the population of the Commonwealth’s 56 nations, but account for over 60% of the carbon emissions generated through extraction since 1990, the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative report shows.
Canada and the UK are no climate angels, given their respective exports of highly polluting oil from oil sands and North Sea oil and gas. But Teo and others in the movement to stop proliferation of fossil fuels have reserved special criticism for Australia. That’s because Australia is now second only to Russia based on emissions from its fossil fuel exports and has the largest pipeline of coal export projects in the world – 61% of the world’s total.
The elephant in the room
Tuvalu, like many other small Pacific nations, is laser-focused on the threat of climate change. Across the Pacific, rising sea levels and saltwater intrusion are already pushing people to consider migration or retreat.
Australia has long been influential in the Pacific, even more so as Western states try to outcompete Chinese funds and influence in the region. But fossil fuel exports are a very large elephant in the room.
As Tuvalu’s leader points out, Australia is:
morally obliged to ensure that whatever action it does [take] will not compromise the commitment it has provided in terms of climate impact.
Teo pointed out the “obvious” inconsistency between Australia’s commitment to net zero by 2050 and ramping up fossil fuel exports.
This year, Australia and Tuvalu’s groundbreaking Falepili Union treaty came into force. The treaty includes some migration rights for Tuvaluans as well as a controversial security agreement. But Teo has now flagged using this as leverage to “put pressure on Australia to align its activities in terms of fossil fuels”.
Tuvalu’s diplomatic pressure is a small part of broader efforts by island states facing escalating climate damage to be seen not as passive victims but to emphasise, as Teo said, they are also “at the forefront of climate action”.
Echoing these sentiments was Vanuatu’s climate envoy, Ralph Regenvanu. He called on Commonwealth nations to “not sacrifice the future of vulnerable nations for short-term gains”, and “to stop the expansion of fossil fuels in order to protect what we love and hold dear here in the Pacific”.
Vanuatu and Tuvalu have led the campaign for a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty, committing signatories to ending expansion of fossil fuels. So far, 12 other nations have joined, including Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Republic of Marshall Islands, Colombia and the CHOGM host, Samoa.
Australia all alone?
It’s not surprising to see Australia facing these calls for action. The meeting is being held in Samoa, the first time a Pacific Island state has hosted Commonwealth leaders.
Leaders of other large Commonwealth states have skipped the meeting. Notable by their absence were Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Climate action is one of several background issues in Apia. One of the more significant is the call for reparations for slavery from former British colonies – calls UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is keen to put to the side. But reports on the ground suggest the issues of reparations, monarchy and the future relevance of the Commonwealth are all in the shadow of the main concern – climate change.
The meeting also serves as a precursor to November’s United Nations climate talks, the COP29 conference in Baku, Azerbaijan. Pacific nations are focused on building consensus on climate finance.
Australia has its own concerns. The host of the 2026 COP31 conference will be announced in Baku, with a joint Australia-Pacific bid in competition with Türkiye. Observers suggest Australia is in the box seat, but it has faced consistent pressure from Pacific states to reconcile its actions with its climate rhetoric.
There are domestic implications too. As the next federal election looms, the lure of a potential A$200 million windfall for the COP host city would be more than welcome.
Securing an Australia-Pacific COP could also boost the government’s environmental credentials as it comes under sustained attack from the Greens over fossil fuels and the Coalition over energy security and nuclear power.
In Apia, Pacific efforts to convince leaders of the need for greater climate action are reported to include a walk through a mangrove reserve for King Charles, guided by Samoan chief and parliamentarian Lenatai Vicor Tamapua. Tamapua told the ABC he showed leaders how king tides today were “about twice what it was 20, 30 years ago”, which he says is forcing people to “move inwards, inland now”.
For Australia, difficult questions remain. How will it balance regional demands to phase out coal and gas exports with domestic pressures to maintain jobs, public funds and economic growth? Can it walk the tightrope and be the partner of choice in the Pacific while continuing to explore for, extract and export coal and gas?
These questions will not be resolved in Apia. They might not even be resolved by the next federal government, or by the time COP31 arrives. But they will not go away.
The way Australia and other exporters resolve these tensions will, as Teo says, decide whether Tuvalu stays liveable – or goes under.
Liam Moore does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
