A very hard blow to science and climate diplomacy. Another wedge planted in the old and shabby hull of multilateralism to break it and sink it.
After twice (in his first and then in his second term) exiting the Paris Agreement, Donald Trump takes a further leap , consistent with his belief that the issue of climate warming is “a scam,” and establishes with an executive order his exit from 66 other international organizations, UN and otherwise, most notably the UNFCCC the Climate Convention created in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, which was signed by the U.S. government as well as those around the world and ratified by the U.S. Senate) that is the lynchpin of climate negotiations, and the IPCC the body, with thousands of scientists as members, established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and Unep to provide a high-level scientific basis for climate policies. But also the Irena, the international agency for renewable energy.
President Trump’s decision completely removes the world’s leading economy and second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases as well as the leading player in climate research from the fight against climate change. It marks an unprecedented rift in global climate cooperation and will lead to a slowdown in climate policies and energy transition.
It is an unparalleled attack on climate governance and science, aiming to strike deep into multilateralism and slow down the energy transition from fossil fuels to renewables as much as possible. It is a leap backwards of more than forty years that will have effects for years and probably for the entire current generation because even in case the next U.S. president decides (as Biden did on Paris) to cancel Trump’s choice it would take years to repair the backlog that will accumulate.
The only potentially positive aspect is that without Trump’s United States, the Unfccc will (theoretically) be freer to implement policies in favor of energy transition and the Ipcc will be able to approve its reports expeditiously and be clearer in its language, two aspects now conditioned by Trump’s “U.S. backstop” and other fossil-producing countries, Saudi Arabia in primis. All to be verified and not ruled out now is the possibility that other ideologically like-minded countries will follow America, from Milei’s trusty Argentina, to Orban’s Hungary, to (but less likely) the oil states of the Arabian Peninsula, Saudi Arabia in primis, and Russia.
Antonello Pasini: “They think they have the truth in their pockets.”
“The idea that the welfare of the United States comes before the welfare of the world and is distinct from it,” observes climatologist Antonello Pasini, “is an absurd and simplistic idea in a complex world where we are all interconnected and no one saves himself. The mors tua vita mea is scientific nonsense, and the decision to leave the Ipcc is nothing less than a slap in the face to science. He says: we do not need science because we have the truth in our pockets. It is consistent with what he has done in the United States by announcing the closure of one of the world’s most accredited climate research centers, Boulder’s Ncar. Anything that goes against his narrative, even and especially scientific data, must be erased. And in this sense, research, which has a rigorous method in addressing problems and does not reason on the basis of ideologies is an enemy. And so Trump decides to close Ncar and get out of the Ipcc.”
“The damage,” Pasini concludes, “will be heavy even if Trump has a deadline in less than three years. The problem is that indivisible climate policies are deleterious on a system that has an inertia that requires continuous action. With a future climate-friendly U.S. presidency these decisions by Trump may well be reabsorbed, over time, but what worries me is that climate denialism is spreading through politics and risks creating a contagion that would undermine the whole fight against climate change.”
“An own goal that will damage the U.S. economy.”
“The U.S. decision to withdraw from the U.N. climate treaty,” commented Simon Stiell, the secretary general of the UNFCCC, “is a colossal own goal that will hurt the U.S. economy, jobs and standard of living. While all other countries are stepping up together, this latest setback from global leadership, climate cooperation and science can only hurt the U.S. economy, jobs and standard of living, as wildfires, floods, storms of gigantic proportions and droughts will rapidly worsen. And it is also a colossal damage to themselves, which will make the United States less safe and less prosperous.”
“To be the only country in the world to pull out of Unfccc,” Gina McCarthy, former Epa administrator and White House National Climate Adviser under Obama, observes for her part, “is a short-sighted, embarrassing and foolish decision. This administration is undermining our country’s ability to influence trillions of dollars worth of investments, policies and decisions that would have benefited our economy and protected us from costly disasters that have devastated our country.”
“The U.S. withdrawal,” points out Rob Jackson, a Stanford University climatologist, putting himself on the same page as Pasini, “is serious in itself but also because it provides other nations with an excuse to delay their own actions and commitments.
The EU: “We will continue on our path.”
Also very concerned is the European Union, which with all its limitations and divisions is still the driving force behind climate policies. “The UNFCCC,” European Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra says on X, “supports global climate action. It brings countries together to support climate, reduce emissions, adapt to climate change and monitor progress. The decision by the world’s largest economy and second largest emitter to pull out is regrettable and unfortunate. We will continue to unequivocally support international climate research as the foundation of our understanding and work. We will continue to work on international climate cooperation. And, at the national level, we will continue to pursue our climate action, competitiveness and independence agenda.”
Even sharper on Bluesky is European Commission Vice President for Clean, Just and Competitive Transition Teresa Ribera: “The White House does not care about the environment, health or people’s suffering. Peace, justice, cooperation or prosperity are not among its priorities. Neither is the great legacy of the United States to global governance. And they make that clear.”
According to sources at the UN Headquarters, the UN Secretary General will also use words of regret and criticism of the U.S. decision, as did environmental organizations. But the Rubicon has been passed and Trump will not turn back. As long as he is at the helm America will be a powerful brake on climate policies and energy transition.
