Just five days after his second inauguration as President of the US, Donald Trump signed an order to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord. The decision formed part of his new executive order, entitled ‘Putting America First in international climate agreements’. It outlined changes to reverse pre-existing US climate regulations, boosting oil and gas production, and comes following the White House’s announcement of a ‘national energy emergency’.
But this is not the first time Trump has pulled out of the international climate treaty. In 2017, Trump withdrew, stating he had been elected to ‘represent the people of Pittsburgh and not Paris’, while also citing the agreement as unfairly burdening American business. The decision was swiftly reversed by the incoming President Biden in 2021.
The newly elected president has a terrible track record on climate policy. Throughout his first term, he repeatedly contradicted his administration’s findings surrounding the threat of climate change, and removed the scientist responsible for the National Climate Assessment. He mocked the concept of rising sea levels, a product of global temperature warming, expected to leave around 1/5 of the world’s population climate change refugees by 2100. He even questioned international scientific consensus surrounding the existence of the climate crisis, stating that ‘the global warming hoax, it just never ends’.
Since former President Obama joined the Agreement in 2016, many other Republicans have also held similar scepticism for it, and international climate policy more generally. According to a report from the Centre for American Progress, climate deniers account for nearly a quarter of US Congress, and all are Republican politicians.
But what exactly is the Paris Climate agreement? According to the UNFCCC (United Nations Convention Framework on Climate Change), the agreement constitutes a ‘legally binding international treaty on climate change’. It aims to cut global greenhouse gas emissions to limit global temperature increases to a maximum of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Adopted by 196 parties at COP21 in Paris in December 2015, Trump’s withdrawal makes the US one of only four other countries to stand outside the agreement, along with Iran, Libya, and Yemen.
Trump’s swift exit from the agreement carries with it a plethora of dangerous implications. In 2024, global temperatures rose more than 1.5 degrees celsius above pre-industrial levels for the first time in history. The US in particular stands as the second biggest global emitter of carbon dioxide, and the largest historical contributor of carbon emissions. Trump’s exit from the agreement denies the US’ huge contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions and, combined with its huge economy, does not bode well for its formerly crucial role in climate governance.
Article 28 of the agreement states that ‘a party may withdraw by giving written notification of its intention’. Given that former President Barack Obama joined back in 2016 using his executive authority without congressional approval, it is not technically beyond the realms of Trump’s power to withdraw using his own executive authority. However, Trump’s withdrawal would mean that the US lacked any decision-making authority in the UN, despite its formerly crucial role in climate governance and economic contributions. The US government is also likely to face global scrutiny over future international environmental policies. Coupled with Trump’s already unfavourable position in the eyes of the UN, particularly regarding his recent plan to take over the Gaza strip, withdrawal seriously endangers the US’ legitimacy on a world stage.
This decision not only threatens the US as a nation in relation to climate policy. The knock-on effect it could have on other nations is equally precarious, particularly in a world where right-wing populist climate scepticism is on the rise. It sends out a message to other nations that it is justified and acceptable to swiftly abandon an internationally legitimised agreement.
Trump recently testified that such agreements ‘steer American taxpayer dollars to countries that do not require, or merit, financial assistance in the interests of the American people’. This is a classic populist move; it frames climate agreements like the Paris Accord as an ‘us vs them’ threat to American working people from elitist business interests, demonstrating Trump’s clear desire to prioritise power and popularity over the scientifically backed threat.
And this is not an unfamiliar narrative. Many other right-wing populist politicians across the globe have acted to systematically deny this grave danger. Current President of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, has dramatically increased the rate of deforestation in the amazon; nicknamed the ‘lungs of the world’, it produces 20% of the world’s oxygen and plays a crucial role in climate regulation. When he received international criticism for this increased deforestation, he framed the condemnation as an attack on using resources for the benefit of Brazilian economic development. Across Europe, right-wing populist climate denial is also growing, with prominent politicians such as Nigel Farage at the forefront, citing climate change as a phenomenon led by liberals to raise taxes and take away the will of the people.
The impacts of President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement cannot be understated. Both nationally and internationally, the exit causes serious concerns for the rapidly increasing rate of global warming. But perhaps more importantly, it signals harmful political narratives which exacerbate climate scepticism and downplay climate change. The imposition of climate policies based on scientific evidence backed by experts, along with the curbing of self-interested, populist politics, will be crucial in the coming years to combat the impending danger of mass extinction.