Climate change presents a quandary for the international state system. In the context of a warming planet, states must look beyond their national self-interest in order to reach voluntary agreements with other sovereign nations about how to collectively reduce the scale and impacts of climate change. Moreover, when one nation takes actions that deliberately undermine global efforts to reduce emissions, other nations face a dilemma: how to hold that nation accountable in the absence of structural and institutional constraints on states’ behavior. In light of these challenges, this paper investigates the following question: How do states socialize foreign nations to address domestic ecological crises, and what explains their success or failure? I leverage my claims through qualitative case studies of wildfires that took place in Brazil and Australia in 2019 and the resultant international response. Using data from policy documents, statements by heads of state, and international reporting, I argue that efforts to socialize these states are differentiated by the claim of communal land ownership leveraged toward Brazil. While this strategy sought to generate collective action by emphasizing a “we’re in this together” mentality, it was also perceived to reproduce discourses of extractive imperialism and undermine Brazil’s territorial claim to the Amazon. I further consider the implications of this research for the study of climate cooperation within the discipline of international relations.