US President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the US from a pivotal global climate treaty could create major funding gaps and open the door for other countries, such as China, to assume more leadership, experts have said.
The Trump administration on Wednesday announced it would withdraw from dozens of international organisations, including scores of UN bodies.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said what started as a “pragmatic framework of international organisations for peace and co-operation has morphed into a sprawling architecture of global governance, often dominated by progressive ideology and detached from national interests”.
Among the most significant is the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, a key treaty signed by nearly every country and which underpins major international climate accords, including the 2015 Paris Agreement that sought to limit global temperature rises to 1.5ºC.
The UNFCCC was adopted at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 and was approved by the US Senate.
Mr Trump, who has dismissed climate change as a “con job”, has twice withdrawn the US from the Paris Agreement. His administration also skipped the UN’s climate talks in Brazil last year.
Why is this significant?
Climate experts who spoke to The National said withdrawing from the UNFCCC would be a more consequential move than leaving the Paris Agreement.
They said it could limit the US’s influence in global climate negotiations, worsen already substantial funding gaps for all development climate and sustainability-related entities as the US is a major contributor, and leave space for other powers, particularly China, to step in. China is now a global leader in clean energy technologies.
“The decision by the US to leave the UNFCCC marks a break with the legal and diplomatic backbone of global climate co-operation,” said Antonios Vouloudis, senior director of sustainability and stewardship at NYU Abu Dhabi.
“When the world’s second-largest emitter [of carbon emissions] signals that this framework is optional, it weakens the credibility of the Paris temperature goals and sends a wider signal that international climate commitments can be set aside whenever they become politically inconvenient.”
Moustafa Bayoumi, who leads the Centre for Climate Diplomacy at the Anwar Gargash Diplomatic Academy in Abu Dhabi said the US would now be unable to participate in any UNFCCC climate negotiations, rather than simply stepping back from the specific commitments of the Paris Agreement.
“This is definitely bigger [than withdrawing from Paris], because the US would lose its ability to influence climate-related discussions and allow more room for leadership from other countries and groups, particularly China.
“We have seen states and corporations step up in the past, but this will undoubtedly create major funding gaps for many organisations, especially those within the UN system.”
Tatiana Antonelli Abella, founder and managing director of Goumbook, a UAE-based sustainability-focused social enterprise, said it “removes the US from critical international discussions on renewable energy, resilience and the policies shaping the global transition”.
Ms Abella said it highlighted the increasingly pivotal role of the private sector, with companies, investors and innovators now bearing greater responsibility to drive climate action.
“Their leadership will be essential to maintaining momentum, accelerating solutions, and ensuring progress continues regardless of political shifts.”
Other withdrawals
Mr Trump has also moved to withdraw the US from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a Nobel Prize-winning body that assesses global warming and the International Renewable Energy Association. It is thought US scientists could, however, still contribute to IPCC reports.
“Withdrawal from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change multiplies the damage. Stepping away from this process sidelines US scientists from a forum that shapes how the world measures climate risk and progress, and looks less like rational reform and more like turning away from evidence,” said Mr Vouloudis.
The legality of the move to withdraw from the UNFCCC is also potentially a grey area.
“This move is legally contested though because joining the UNFCCC required senate approval so legal experts are questioning the possibility of withdrawing without the same,” said Mr Bayoumi.
The US move could be seen as another erosion of multilateralism. It also comes as grinding wars from Gaza to Ukraine take the attention away from climate action.
“The consequences will be felt most acutely in climate-vulnerable regions, from low-lying Pacific states to already hot and dry parts of the Middle East and North Africa,” said Mr Vouloudis.
“Seen from the rest of the world, including the UAE, which helped steer Cop28 outcomes, this is a deeply worrying signal. It slows collective action in the decisive decade for 1.5°C, weakens the scientific and diplomatic systems that allow us to manage climate risk, and accelerates a loss of trust in the basic idea of shared global stewardship.”
