“We are going to save a trillion dollars by withdrawing from the treaty,” said Trump as the U.S. initiated its withdrawal from the Paris Climate Pact on the first day of his second term in office. America is withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement for the second time. The 2025 inauguration of Trump marked a new wave. Following the declaration of a National Energy Emergency, Trump called the latest changes a “revolution of common sense” and said, “We’ll drill, baby, drill,” reprising the 2008 RNC slogan by Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele. This statement spurred cheers in the gas and oil industry but caused concern among several countries, including China. Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said: “China is concerned about the U.S. announcement that it will withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Climate change is a common challenge facing all of humanity. No country can stay out of it, and no country can be immune to it.” This withdrawal and other refined decisions significantly impact climate change efforts, developing nations, and global diplomacy.
Understanding the Paris Agreement
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) proposed the Paris Agreement. This legally binding international climate change treaty aims to reduce and limit greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. This agreement was signed and adopted by 196 countries on 12 December 2015 at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21). It came into force on 4 November 2016. The Paris Agreement urges its State Parties to limit the global temperature rise to below 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial levels and to initiate efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel has warned that crossing the 1.5-degree Celsius threshold risks unleashing several climate disasters like droughts, heatwaves, and erratic rainfall. When the agreement came into force in 2016, the U.S. pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 28% below 2005 levels by 2025. Along with its commitments, the U.S. has also contributed $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund (established within the UNFCCC), which aims to raise $100 billion by the end of 2020. The U.S., being the most significant historical contributor of greenhouse gases and the second-largest emitter after China, backing out from a climate conservation pact poses a threat to the entire world as there is no authority or law to monitor the adverse effects on the environment caused by the U.S.
Why is the US Withdrawing?
A recent tax reform strategy in the U.S. proposed eliminating the electric vehicle (EV) tax credit. This plan aims to preserve funds for expiring tax cuts, but the intention to prioritise fossil fuel energy is evident and confirmed by Trump’s statement: “We’ll drill, baby, drill.” This statement is also backed by initiatives like Project 2025, which provides a framework for a comprehensive strategy to increase fossil fuel production and promote fracking in Texas and Pennsylvania. The Trump administration justifies these recent changes. They argue that promoting the fossil fuel sector will benefit people through job opportunities and energy independence. The U.S. will eventually benefit from deregulation and expanded drilling operations by having one of the largest domestic fossil fuel productions, reducing its foreign dependency on energy sources, and avoiding external foreign control over its economic policies.
The U.S. views the Paris Climate Agreement as an economic disadvantage. When America announced its withdrawal from the agreement for the first time, Trump stated: “The Paris Accord is very unfair at the highest level to the United States. The agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States.” Earlier, the U.S. had expressed concerns over various protocols and agreements impeding their economy, as seen with the withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol. Then, President George W. Bush justified his decision by addressing his opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, which exempted 80 percent of the world, including countries with large populations such as India and China, from compliance. In both cases, Trump and Bush criticised the initiative by emphasising that they were unfair and ineffective means of addressing climate concerns.
As the UNFCCC framework says, “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities” (CBDR-RC), several developed nations, including the U.S., are subjected to paying climate finance to developing countries. Developed countries have emitted a considerable amount of greenhouse gases in the past. Still, developing nations are forced to use renewable and sustainable methods for development, which is costly and burdensome to their economies. Hence, CBDR-RC was reaffirmed in the Kyoto Protocol (1997) and the Paris Agreement (2015) to pay the price for past actions and support developing nations vulnerable to climate change.
The World Without U.S Climate Leadership
The new reforms in the U.S. have created a perception that climate action is no longer a priority for the world’s largest economy. It has also affected the broader international climate landscape. The U.S. was one of the most significant contributors to the Green Climate Fund, which provides financial aid to developing nations for adapting to sustainable projects. Trump’s withdrawal led to a funding gap for developing countries, as there was a $3 billion pledge in the agreement. The sudden changes will adversely affect the developing nations’ progress and limit their capabilities to continue favouring renewable and sustainable energies. The U.S. withdrawal will diminish a sense of shared responsibility among nations, as it is a key player in global diplomacy. This will also create a leadership vacuum, forcing developing countries to fill the gap, which shifts global expectations.
Conclusion
The withdrawal of the U.S. from climate agreements raises concerns about climate diplomacy and the implementation of international environmental law. The new stance of the U.S. will drastically change global climate agreements as several countries adjust their climate policies in response. Developing countries will struggle to meet their goals due to fluctuations in climate finance policies and the loss of U.S. contributions. As the world’s largest emitter weakens its commitments, other countries are less likely to meet their annual targets. The self-centred motives of the U.S. undermine international cooperation and pose a risk of a leadership vacuum. Rapid drilling and the declaration of a national energy emergency force the global community to face the challenges of rising emissions and collaborate more effectively to ensure the planet’s future without burdening developing countries beyond their limits but serving both economic and environmental interests.
