withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement

In April 2016, the United States became a signatory to the Paris Agreement on climate change mitigation, and accepted it by executive order in September 2016. President Obama committed the United States to contributing US$3 billion to the Green Climate Fund. On June 1, 2017, U.S. president Donald Trump announced that the United States would cease all participation in the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change mitigation, contending that the agreement would "undermine" the U.S. economy, and put the U.S. "at a permanent disadvantage".

In accordance with Article 28 of the Paris Agreement, a country cannot give notice of withdrawal from the agreement within the first three years of its start date in the relevant country, which was on November 4, 2016, in the case of the United States. The White House later clarified that the U.S. would abide by the four-year exit process. On November 4, 2019, the administration gave a formal notice of intention to withdraw, which takes 12 months to take effect. The withdrawal took effect on November 4, 2020, one day after the 2020 U.S. presidential election. However, the U.S. still has to report its greenhouse gas inventory because it remains in the UNFCCC.

The decision to withdraw the U.S. was backed by many RepublicansLisa Friedman
Staking Out Battle Lines, House Votes to Keep U.S. in Paris Climate Pact
, ''The New York Times'' (May 2, 2019).Scott Clement & Brady Dennis
Post-ABC poll: Nearly 6 in 10 oppose Trump scrapping Paris agreement
, ''The Washington Post'' (June 5, 2017). but was strongly opposed by Democrats.Michael Edison Hayden
Democrats, environmentalists blast idea US could leave the Paris accord
, ABC News (May 31, 2017). However, it was strongly criticized in the U.S. and abroad by environmentalists,Jeff Tollefson
It's official: Trump begins process to exit Paris climate agreement
, ''Nature'' (November 4, 2019). religious organizations, business leaders, and scientists. According to polls released in 2019, a majority opposed the withdrawal. Following Trump's announcement, the governors of several U.S. states formed the U.S. Climate Alliance to continue to advance the objectives of the Paris Agreement at the state level despite the federal withdrawal. As of July 1, 2019, 24 states, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico have joined the alliance, and similar commitments have also been expressed by other state governors, mayors, and businesses. The withdrawal from the Paris agreement impacted other countries by reducing its financial aid to the Green Climate fund. The termination of the $3 billion U.S. funding ultimately impacted climate change research and decreased society's chance of reaching the Paris Agreement goals, as well as omitted U.S. contributions to the future IPCC reports. It also affected the carbon emission space as well as the carbon price. The U.S.'s withdrawal also meant that the spot to take over the global climate regime was obtainable for China and the EU.

Following the 2020 presidential election, President-elect Joe Biden vowed to rejoin the Paris Agreement on his first day in office. On January 20, 2021, shortly after his inauguration, President Biden signed an executive order to rejoin the agreement. The United States formally rejoined the Paris Agreement on February 19, 2021, 107 days after the withdrawal took effect. On January 20, 2025, shortly after his second inauguration, President Trump signed an executive order to withdraw the United States from the agreement for a second time.

Background and ratification

The Paris Agreement was an addition to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), initially agreed to by all 195 countries present at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in December of that year, including the United States then under the presidency of Barack Obama. Due to the status of the United States and China as the greatest emitters of carbon dioxide, Obama's support and his cooperation with China were seen as major factors leading to the convention's early success.

The main aim of the Agreement is to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels", predominantly by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Agreement differs from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the last widely adopted amendment to the UNFCCC, in that no annexes are established to lessen responsibility of developing nations. Rather, emissions targets for each nation were separately negotiated and are to be voluntarily enforced, leading United States officials to regard the Paris Agreement as an executive agreement rather than a legally binding treaty. This removed the requirement for the United States Congress to ratify the agreement.

In April 2016, the United States became a signatory to the Paris Agreement, and accepted it by executive order in September 2016. President Obama committed the United States to contributing US$3 billion to the Green Climate Fund. The Fund has set itself a goal of raising $100 billion a year by 2020.

First withdrawal

Article 28 of the agreement enables parties to withdraw from the agreement after sending a withdrawal notification to the depositary, but notice can be given no earlier than three years after the agreement goes into force for the country. Withdrawal is effective one year after the depositary is notified. Alternatively, the Agreement stipulates that withdrawal from the UNFCCC, under which the Paris Agreement was adopted, would also withdraw the state from the Paris Agreement. The conditions for withdrawal from the UNFCCC are the same as for the Paris Agreement.

On November 8, 2016, four days after the Paris Agreement entered into force in the United States, Donald Trump of the Republican Party was elected President of the United States. Many conservative Republicans dispute the level of human involvement in climate change. Trump rejects the scientific consensus on climate change and tweeted in 2012 that he believed the concept of global warming was created by China in order to impair American competitiveness. During Trump's 2016 election campaign, Trump promised to revitalize the coal industry, which he claimed has been hampered by environmental regulations. It has been argued that this contributed to the support he enjoyed from crucial swing states. His opposition to climate change mitigation was unchanged in the first months of his presidency, in which he issued an executive order to reverse Obama's Clean Power Plan and other environmental regulations.

In April 2017, a group of 20 members of the European Parliament from the right-wing Alternative for Germany, UK Independence Party, and other parties sent a letter to Trump on urging him to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. On May 25, 2017, 22 Republican Senators, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, sent a two-page letter to Trump urging him to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement. The letter was drafted by Senator John Barrasso, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and Senator Jim Inhofe, known for his longtime climate change denial.Tom McCarthy & Lauren Gambino
The Republicans who urged Trump to pull out of Paris deal are big oil darlings
, ''The Guardian'' (June 1, 2017). Most of signatories to the letter were elected from states reliant on the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas); the group of 22 senators had collectively received more than $10 million in campaign contributions from fossil-fuels companies in the previous three election cycles. Earlier the same week, a group of 40 Democratic Senators sent Trump a letter urging him to keep America in the Paris Agreement, writing that "a withdrawal would hurt America's credibility and influence on the world stage."

Both support for the move and opposition to it were reported among Trump's cabinet and advisers: Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, economic advisor Gary Cohn, and advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner reportedly wanted the United States to remain committed to the agreement, while White House Advisor Steve Bannon, White House Counsel Don McGahn, and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt wanted the United States to abandon it.

During the G7 summit in late May 2017, Trump was the only G7 member not to reconfirm commitment to the Paris Agreement. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, one of the other leaders present, was publicly unimpressed with Trump's refusal to cooperate on climate change mitigation, which was seen to damage Germany–United States relations. The communique issued at the conclusion of the summit stated that the United States "is not in a position to join the consensus" of the other G7 countries on policies regarding climate change and the Paris Agreement.

Announcement

In a televised announcement from the White House Rose Garden on June 1, 2017, Trump said, "In order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect the United States and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord," adding "The bottom line is that the Paris accord is very unfair at the highest level to the United States." He claimed that the agreement, if implemented, would cost the United States $3 trillion in lost GDP and 6.5 million jobs. He added that it would "undermine our economy, hamstring our workers," and "effectively decapitate our coal industry". He said he was open to renegotiating the arrangement or negotiating a new one, but European and UN leaders said the pact "cannot be renegotiated at the request of a single party". Trump also criticized the Green Climate Fund, calling it a scheme to redistribute wealth from rich to poor countries.

The White House said that Trump would end the implementation of carbon reduction targets set by former President Barack Obama and that the withdrawal would be done in accordance with the years-long exit process spelled out in the accord. On September 16, 2017, a European official said the Trump administration had appeared to soften its stance on withdrawing the agreement. The White House told the press that it had not changed its position on the agreement.

Examinations of Trump's speech by ''The Washington Post'' and ''The New York Times'' pointed to numerous fallacies, including, but not limited to, claims that the U.S., under the Paris Agreement, was forbidden to build coal power plants; that a difference of 0.2 degrees Celsius is insignificant in climatology; that U.S. contributions to the Green Climate Fund were paid out of the U.S. defense budget; projections that the U.S. is on course to become the "cleanest" nation on earth; and Trump's reiterated claim of personal support for environmental causes.

Process

In accordance with Article 28 of the Paris Agreement, the United States could only file its notice of intent to withdraw no earlier than November 4, 2019, three years after the Agreement had come into effect, which would be effective one year later. Until the withdrawal took effect, the United States was obligated to maintain its commitments under the Agreement, including the requirement to continue reporting its emissions to the United Nations. According to a memo obtained by HuffPost believed to be written by U.S. State Department legal office, any "attempts to withdraw from the Paris Agreement outside of the above-described withdrawal provisions would be inconsistent with international law and would not be accepted internationally."

On August 4, 2017, the Trump administration formally outlined its intention of the withdrawal in an official notice delivered to the United Nations as depositary. In a separate statement, the State Department said it will continue participating in international climate change negotiations, including talks aimed at implementing the climate deal.

The United States filed its intent to withdraw at the earliest possible date, on November 4, 2019. After the one-year period, on November 4, 2020, the U.S. formally withdrew from the Agreement, on the day following the 2020 U.S. presidential election but rejoined the agreement when President Biden took office.

Effects

The Obama administration was responsible for funding $3 billion U.S. dollars to the Green Climate Fund, that will no longer be available to be used towards climate change research. Therefore, a decrease in funds by the U.S. will lessen the chances of being able to reach the Paris Agreement goals. In addition, the U.S. was responsible for more than 50% of the papers references for climate change in 2015, so a cut in funding will impact U.S's contribution to any further IPCC reports. Trump's termination of its funding to the Green Climate Fund can also have an impact on underdeveloped countries that are in need of that aid for their climate change projects. The U.S. withdrawal decision leaves a large gap in the climate aid that the developed countries have promised to the developing countries (Kemp, 2017, as cited in Hai-Bing Zhan 2017).

However, President Trump's decision to withdraw did not necessarily mean that it affected U.S. emissions since there was no direct link, but instead meant that the U.S. was no longer regulated by the Paris Agreement once officially withdrawn. On the other hand, since the U.S. was not regulated this influenced a change to the carbon emission space. For example, " der the NDC target, the withdrawal of the U.S. led to it increasing its own emission space by 14%, 28%, and 54% in the 20, 13, and 00 scenarios, respectively." This meant that the U.S. would obtain more room to emit carbon while other countries would have to cut down on their emissions in order to be able to reach their goal of only 2 °C. Trump's withdrawal increased the carbon price for other countries while reducing its own carbon price.

When the withdrawal took effect, the U.S. was the only UNFCCC member states who was not a signatory to the Paris Agreement. At the time of the original withdrawal announcement, Syria and Nicaragua were also not participants; however, both Syria and Nicaragua later ratified the agreement which left the U.S. the only UNFCCC member state that wasn't intending to be a party to the Paris Agreement.

Luke Kemp of the Australian National University's Fenner School of Environment and Society wrote in a commentary for ''Nature'' that "withdrawal is unlikely to change US emissions" since "the greenhouse gas emissions of the US are divorced from international legal obligations." However, he added that it could hamper climate change mitigation efforts if the U.S. stopped contributing to the Green Climate Fund. Kemp said the effect of a U.S. withdrawal could be either good or bad for the Paris agreement, since "a rogue US can cause more damage inside rather than outside of the agreement." Finally, "A withdrawal could also make the US into a climate pariah and provide a unique opportunity for China and the EU to take control of the climate regime and significantly boost their international reputations and soft power." On the other hand there is belief that China is not capable of taking control of the climate regime and instead should, "help rebuild global shared leadership by replacing the Sino–U.S. G2 partnership with a Climate 5 (C5) partnership that comprises China, the EU, India, Brazil, and South Africa."

Potential economic impact

The German car industry expressed concerns about its ability to remain competitive in light of the United States decision to withdraw. The president of the German auto industry lobby group VDA, Matthias Wissmann said, "The regrettable announcement by the USA makes it inevitable that Europe must facilitate a cost efficient and economically feasible climate policy to remain internationally competitive."

Many of the larger auto and aviation companies had already invested billions into reducing emissions and were unlikely to change course. General Motors, the largest automobile manufacturer in the United States, immediately pointed out: "Our position on climate change has not changed ... we publicly advocate for climate action," and reiterated its support for various climate pledges. Analyst Rebecca Lindland also pointed out that manufacturers of automobiles were under no specific restrictions under the Accord and that nothing had changed. Even if Trump loosened other restrictions on the car industry that allowed for the production of less environmental cars, such cars still needed to conform to standards before they could be exported to other continents or even certain states. Jason Bordoff, energy-policy expert at Columbia University, agreed that withdrawing would make no difference to the economy, arguing that it would be determined by market conditions like the price of oil and gas. At the same time, airlines have been spending billions on seeking more fuel efficient ways to fly anyway –fuel is an airline's second-biggest expense after labor and so using less fuel (which means less emissions) is in their financial interest. Kabir Nanda and Varad Pande, senior consultant and partner at Dahlberg, respectively, argued that despite the U.S. withdrawal the American private sector was still committed to renewable energy and technology. Also noted was the fact that solar energy had become cheaper than coal in an increasing number of countries.

Reactions

Petitions

Petitions were launched across states in order to persuade state governors to join the Paris Agreement or have Trump reverse the planned withdrawal, which included a " ParisMyState" and a MoveOn petition that has received over 535,000 signatures.

Scientists and environmentalists

Piers Forster, the director of the University of Leeds' Priestley International Centre for Climate, called the decision to withdraw "a sad day for evidence-based policy" and expressed hope that individual Americans, businesses and states would nevertheless choose to decarbonize. Climate scientist Dave Reay of the University of Edinburgh said that "The United States will come to rue this day." The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR), in a statement by its president Antonio Busalacchi Jr., said that the decision to withdraw "does not mean that climate change will go away" and warned that "the heightened potential for increased greenhouse gas emissions poses a substantial threat to our communities, businesses, and military." The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation called the decision to withdraw "very discouraging" and said that it would diminish confidence in international climate change efforts; the technology think tank called for federal efforts on "the smart grid, energy storage, carbon capture and sequestration, and advanced nuclear and solar power" and warned that "Without a smart, aggressive clean-energy innovation strategy, the world will not avert the worst effects of climate change."

Canadian academic and environmental activist David Suzuki stated, "Trump just passed on the best deal the planet has ever seen". Navroz Dubash of the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi expressed bafflement at Trump's move, citing the declining costs of renewable energy sources and the increasing difficulty of obtaining investment for fossil-fuel projects. Environmental scientist and risk assessor Dana Nuccitelli stated that it "now seems inevitable that the history books will view Trump as America's worst-ever president". Bob Ward of the Grantham Research Institute also described Trump's speech as "confused nonsense". Stephen Hawking criticized Trump, saying that he "will cause avoidable environmental damage to our beautiful planet, endangering the natural world, for us and our children."

Multiple environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council, condemned Trump's decision. American environmentalist and writer Bill McKibben, the founder of the climate change action group 350.org, called the move "a stupid and reckless decision—our nation's dumbest act since launching the war in Iraq." McKibben wrote that Trump's decision to withdraw amounted "to a thorough repudiation of two of the civilizing forces on our planet: diplomacy and science." He called upon U.S. states and cities to "double down" on commitments to renewable energy.

Domestic political response

= Republicans

=
Republicans gave mixed reviews of Trump's decision to withdraw. Vice president Mike Pence stated that Trump administration "demonstrated real leadership" by pulling the United States out of the international accords which he called "a transfer of wealth from the most powerful economy in the world to other countries around the planet". He also stated that he doesn't understand why Democrats and liberals in the United States and the left around the world care about climate change. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway and Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt praised the decision as a victory for America's middle class, workers, businesses and coal miners. Texas Attorney General