The withdrawal of the United States (USA) from dozens of multilateral organizations, especially the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Green Climate Fund (Green Climate Fund – GCF), the main international financing mechanism for climate action, will have a global impact, but will be even more harmful to North Americans themselves.
This was stated by the executive secretary of the UNFCCC, Simon Stiell, when commenting on the decision of Donald Trump’s government, which will also leave the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), also of the UN, which brings together the most renowned climate scientists and publishes reports on global warming. Stiell said that measure is a colossal own goal.
Paris Agreement
“The United States was instrumental in creating the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement, both of which are entirely in the national interest. While all other nations move forward together, this new setback for global leadership, climate cooperation, and science can only harm the U.S. economy, jobs, and standard of living as wildfires, floods, megastorms, and droughts rapidly worsen. It is a colossal own goal that will leave the United States less safe and less prosperous”, he stated in a note.
In total, the US has withdrawn from a total of 66 international organizationsin an announcement made this Wednesday (7).
More expensive
The UNFCCC is the entity of the United Nations (UN) that holds the United Nations Conference on Climate Change (COP) every year. The last one was COP30in November last year, in Belém.
For Simon Stiell, the consequence of this North American decision, in practice, will mean higher energy, food, transport and insurance prices for families and companies in the country, “as [energias] renewables continue to become cheaper than fossil fuels, as climate-driven disasters hit American crops, businesses and infrastructure harder every year, and the volatility of oil, coal and gas generates more conflict, regional instability and forced migration.”
In the view of the Talanoa Institute, a Brazilian non-governmental organization that works in the climate debate, the US decision to abandon the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the UN Climate Convention represents a new chapter of political shock in the midst of the global climate crisis.
“It is a retreat that weakens American credibility, but it does not alone determine the direction of global climate governance. If other countries follow Trump or if the others do not take on the responsibility of leading, this will be a low moment, with real costs in coordination, ambition and financing. If new leaders present themselves, the system can go through this period without collapse. The difference will be in the collective reaction and it needs to be quick”, he noted.
For now, according to Natalie Unterstell, president of the Talanoa Institute, the multilateral regime continues to operate, but international climate financing should suffer an immediate drop.
Energy
In a note to justify the departure of the IGF, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent cited Trump and called the fund a radical organization. “Our nation will no longer fund radical organizations like the GCF whose goals run counter to the fact that affordable, reliable energy is critical to economic growth and poverty reduction,” he said.
According to Bessent, the United States is committed to advancing all affordable and reliable energy sources, but the GCF was created to complement the objectives of the UNFCCC and continued participation in the GCF was considered incompatible with the priorities and goals of the Trump administration.
