Climate change: US formally withdraws from Paris agreement

After a three-year delay, the United States has become the first nation in the world to formally withdraw from the Paris climate agreement.

President Trump announced the move in June 2017, but UN regulations meant his decision will only go into effect today, the day after the US election.

The United States could rejoin it in the future, if a president decides to do so.

The Paris agreement was drafted in 2015 to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change.

Their goal is to keep this century’s global temperature rise well below 2 ° C above pre-industrial levels and to make efforts to limit the temperature rise even further to 1.5 ° C.

The delay is due to the complex rules that were included in the Paris agreement to deal with the possibility that a future US president may decide to withdraw the country from the agreement.

Previous attempts to put together a global pact on climate change had failed due to domestic politics in the United States.

The Clinton administration was unable to secure Senate backing for the Kyoto Protocol, agreed in 1997.

So in the run-up to the Paris climate talks, President Obama’s negotiators wanted to make sure it would take a while for the United States to come out if there was a change in leadership.

Although the agreement was signed in December 2015, the treaty only entered into force on November 4, 2016, 30 days after at least 55 countries representing 55% of global emissions had ratified it.

No country can give notice to abandon the agreement until three years have elapsed from the date of ratification.

Even then, a member state still had to serve a 12-month notification period at the UN.

So, despite President Trump’s announcement at the White House in June 2017, the United States was only able to formally notify the UN in November of last year. Time has passed and the United States is already out.

Although the United States now accounts for about 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions, it is still the largest and most powerful economy in the world.

So when it becomes the only country to back out of a global solution to a global problem, it raises questions about trust.

For the past three years, US negotiators have attended the UN climate talks, while the administration has tried to use these events to promote fossil fuels.

“Going out formally obviously damages America’s reputation,” said Andrew Light, a former senior climate change official in the Obama administration.

“This will be the second time the United States has been the main force behind the negotiation of a new climate agreement – with the Kyoto Protocol we never ratify it, in the case of the Paris Agreement, we leave it.”

“So I think it’s obviously a problem.”

Although this has been a long time coming, there is still a palpable sense of disappointment for many Americans who believe that climate change is the greatest global challenge and that the United States should lead the fight against it.

“The decision to abandon the Paris agreement was wrong when it was announced and remains wrong today,” said Helen Mountford of the World Resources Institute.

“Simply put, the United States should keep the other 189 parts of the agreement, not go out alone.”

The formal withdrawal has also reopened old wounds for climate diplomats.

“It is definitely a major blow to the Paris agreement,” said Carlos Fuller of Belize, the lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States at the UN talks.

“In fact, we worked very hard to ensure that every country in the world could agree to this new agreement. So by losing one, we feel that we have basically failed.”

Others say the US withdrawal is partly due to the Obama administration’s failure to get the US Senate to ratify the Paris agreement.

“What Obama did at the end of his second term was fundamentally undemocratic, signing a Paris accord without going to the Senate and Congress and doing it by executive order,” said former UN climate chief Yvo De Boer.

“And then, in a way, you are preparing for what has happened now.”

In fact, while campaigning, Joe Biden said he would seek to rejoin as soon as possible, if elected president.

Under the rules, all that is required is a one month notice and US.

However, even if the US opted to re-enter the deal, there would be consequences for being out, even for a few months.

“We know that the UK, the EU and the UN Secretary-General are planning an event on December 12, on the fifth anniversary of the conclusion of the negotiations for the Paris agreement, where they will try to push for more ambition.” , said. Andrew Light.

“According to the Paris rules, the United States will not be able to participate in that.”

President Trump made leaving Paris a key part of his electoral platform in 2016, linking it to his vision of a revitalized America with booming energy production, especially coal and oil.

His perspective on the Paris deal was that it was unfair to the US, leaving countries like India and China free to use fossil fuels while the US had to cut their carbon.

“I’m not sure what Paris really achieves,” said Katie Tubb, a senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in the United States.

“In terms of getting to the end of the century, if the goal is to reduce global temperatures, it simply cannot be done at the expense of the industrialized world.”

“No matter what you think about global warming, and the nature of it, the pace of it, you have to take these growing economies seriously and help them, and I didn’t see Paris come to that end, in any efficient way or way. constructive. “

In the wake of the president’s announcement in 2017, several states and companies have pledged to continue reducing carbon and trying to offset the federal government’s decision to walk away from the U.S. pledge in Paris.

Among them are America’s Pledge, drawn up by former California Governor Jerry Brown and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

They say states and cities will help reduce America’s emissions by 19% compared to 2025 compared to 2005; that’s not enough to make up for America’s promise in Paris, but it keeps those goals “within reach.”

“The public understands that fighting climate change goes hand in hand with protecting our health and growing our economy,” Michael Bloomberg said in a statement.

“So despite the White House’s best efforts to roll back our country, it hasn’t stopped our climate progress for the last four years.”

On the business front, there has been increasing pressure from shareholders in large fossil fuel-based industries to meet the climate challenge.

A proposal submitted by BNP Paribas Asset Management garnered a 53% majority of votes in Chevron: it asked the oil giant to ensure that its climate lobbying was in line with the goals of the Paris agreement.

“I don’t think anyone is following Trump out of Paris,” said Peter Betts, a former UK-EU chief negotiator on global climate negotiations and now an associate member of Chatham House.

“Nobody has done it in the last four years and I don’t think they will do it in the future.”

Some worry that the US withdrawal will slow other countries down, at a time when scientists say efforts should be accelerated.

Several countries, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Russia, have already shown a willingness to side with US efforts to roll back the science around global warming.

“They are biding their time, they are saying that if the United States is not there, then we don’t have to rush to do anything right now,” said Carlos Fuller, lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States.

“I think they are hedging their bets to see what kind of better deal they can get and not fold.”

Others are hopeful that America’s withdrawal will boost a sense of unity among others and see new leadership emerge.

“The EU’s green deal and the carbon neutrality commitments of China, Japan, and South Korea point to the inevitability of our collective transition from fossil fuels,” said Laurence Tubiana, one of the architects of the Paris agreement and now executive director of the European Climate Foundation. .

“There will always be roadblocks as the global economy shifts away from oil, gas and coal, but the overall direction of the journey is clear. As governments prepare stimulus packages to rescue their economies from COVID-19, it is vital. to invest in technologies of the future, not the past. “