If Trump Were to Pull the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement Again, It Will Be Much Harder to Rejoin
Technicalities and hesitations softened the effect of Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement during his presidency, but a second attempt at a departure could be more serious
CLIMATEWIRE | Donald Trump pulled America out of the Paris climate agreement once. But while his loud condemnations of the deal drew rebukes from world leaders, the withdrawal itself resulted in ripples rather than tidal waves for the landmark agreement.
It could be different if Trump is elected this year.
That’s because the terms of the agreement would allow for a faster exit this time. A withdrawal could also undermine global efforts to increase the flow of climate aid to threatened countries and prepare a would-be Trump administration to also leave the international treaty underpinning the agreement, the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Industry lawyers have drafted several executive orders that Trump might consider signing if he wins, including one that would remove the U.S. from the UNFCCC. The Trump campaign has said the former president would leave the Paris Agreement if he's reelected.
All of this comes amid a searing summer that has already been punctuated by a record-breaking hurricane and deadly heat waves.
Here are five ways a second Trump withdrawal from Paris could be different than the first time.
Trump entered the Oval Office in 2017 fresh off a campaign where he called climate science a hoax and vowed to “cancel” the Paris Agreement.
But it took him six months, until June, to announce that the U.S. was withdrawing. At the time, Trump claimed that the agreement created unfair economic burdens on American workers and businesses.
“I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” Trump said in a speech from the White House Rose Garden on June 1, 2017.
Because of technicalities within the Paris Agreement, it took until Nov. 4, 2020 — the day after Biden was elected president — for the withdrawal to take effect. Biden moved to reenter the agreement on Jan. 20, 2021, his first day in office.
This time, Trump could get to work right away, setting up an exit from the pact about a year after he enters office.
“It would be a very different timeline now,” said David Waskow, director of the international climate initiative at the World Resources Institute.
In 2016, the United States had already submitted its first round of emission-cutting targets to the U.N., depriving Trump the chance to withhold them. This time, a new round of targets is due just after Trump would be inaugurated, potentially giving him broad authority to weaken or cancel the United States' global climate goals.
The 2025 round of so-called nationally determined contributions are meant to ramp up past promises. The U.S. goals — which currently call for emissions reductions of 50-52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 — are closely watched because of the motivational effect they can have on other nations' commitments.
“If you have an American president who doesn't give a damn about climate change other than to ridicule it, then there obviously is no pressure coming from the United States toward a country like China,” said Todd Stern, who served as special envoy for climate change under former President Barack Obama.
Even if the Biden administration drafts its new climate goals before Trump would take office — as White House climate adviser John Podesta has indicated — they would be moot under a Trump administration.
Trump mulled leaving the treaty that underpins the Paris Agreement eight years ago — but didn’t. This time, several prominent conservative voices are leaning harder into that option.
Trump’s former EPA chief of staff Mandy Gunasekara has been preaching the outcome of leaving the treaty. She told POLITICO's E&E News earlier this year that it would provide a “more permanent response” to getting out of deals “that do little to actually improve the environment.”
Withdrawing from the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change would automatically trigger a departure from the Paris deal and any other obligations under the convention, including regular reporting of emissions inventories.
Like Paris, it isn’t binding, and there are no penalties for not participating. But when a country is party to a treaty, there is an expectation that it would work toward meeting the spirit of the agreement, said Alden Meyer, a senior associate at the climate think tank E3G.
Leaving the treaty, which was ratified by U.S. Senate, stands to bruise U.S. foreign relations. It could also make it difficult for a future government to reenter the convention. It’s unclear if withdrawing from the treaty would require Senate approval, but a two-thirds vote could be needed to get back in.
The Trump campaign did not respond to questions about whether the former president would leave the UNFCCC.
It wasn't just Paris that Trump dumped.
He also stopped the U.S. from contributing to the U.N. Green Climate Fund, a pot of cash meant to help poorer countries address global warming. If he wins this time, the specter of funding cuts would come just as countries are gathering for the COP29 climate talks in Baku, Azerbaijan, which will focus on setting new targets for financial assistance to developing countries.
The talks begin days after the election, and early meetings over the new finance goal have already exposed deep divisions.
Countries are skeptical of revealing a dollar figure because if the U.S. stops contributing “they’re left with the bill,” said Michai Robertson, a senior finance adviser for the Alliance of Small Island States.
“People are not committing to anything right now because they don't want to overcommit,” he said.
The Biden administration has worked to close the gap left by years of funding cuts under Trump, even as congressional Republicans have made international climate aid a political target.
There are no financial obligations under the Paris Agreement or the UNFCCC. But many countries expect the U.S. — the world's largest economy and the biggest historical source of carbon emissions — to provide substantial funding.
Europe and China stepped up after Trump was elected last time, promising to help fill an America-sized hole in climate ambition. State and city leaders rallied together. Even before Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from Paris, a phrase began circulating among advocates of international climate cooperation: We are still in.
Now, Europe is facing its own political turbulence and a Russian war on its boundaries. China’s economy has slumped and its relations with Western nations are embroiled by trade tensions that could make cooperation more challenging.
Some U.S. states are moving fast to implement climate policy. But many have hesitated to impose stiffer regulations that could send businesses across state lines, preferring instead to rely on federal funding from Biden’s climate law to reduce emissions. The benefits of that law, however, have been slow to materialize for the public.
One big difference is that the unraveling of climate efforts wouldn’t be a surprise, as it was when Trump won in 2016. That said, there are still limits to how prepared the world can be for a disruptive United States.
“The real question is what real action or what commitments will countries put on the table in Baku,” said Li Shuo, director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute. “I don't think the rest of the world has thought through these questions, but they need to.”
Reporter Adam Aton contributed.
Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2024. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.
Sara Schonhardt covers climate and energy developments globally, with a focus on international climate negotiations, finance and how countries are approaching the transition to cleaner economies. Prior to joining E&E News, Sara worked as a reporter for more than a decade across much of Southeast Asia, with stints for The New York Times, Christian Science Monitor and Voice of America. She was a staff reporter for The Wall Street Journal in Indonesia until 2017. Sara has a degree in journalism from Ohio University and a master's degree in international affairs from Columbia University.
E&E News provides essential energy and environment news for professionals.
