When US President Donald Trump announced last week that American forces had unilaterally invaded Venezuela and captured its leader, Nicolas Maduro, many wondered what it said about the growing fragility of the international system. When, the very next day, Mr Trump repeated his long-standing position that the US "needs" to take control of Greenland, the system began to seem not just fragile, but outright brittle.
On Wednesday, Mr Trump circulated a memo to senior US officials announcing that America plans to withdraw from more than 60 global organisations, conventions and treaties – ranging from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (the world's pre-eminent treaty on fighting global warming) to the Global Counterterrorism Forum. Now, many are asking whether the international system as we all knew it will continue in the same way at all.
The world is, by now, used to Mr Trump shaking things up – though that never seems to make the experience less surprising. Often, his supporters say, he does so in order to shock America's allies into much-needed change. His open contempt for Nato and ambivalence towards Ukraine, they argue, has forced European countries to take their own defence – and paying for it – seriously. His dismantling of USAID, the world's largest aid agency, last year directly affected the world’s most vulnerable, but it has also forced the global humanitarian and development sectors, which have long struggled with wasteful spending, to think on their sins and justify their budgets.
Wednesday's announcement, however, appears to be about something other than promoting self-reliance among European countries or saving American taxpayers money. As the memo's title reads, the entities and agreements from which America is withdrawing "are contrary to the interests of the United States". They promote, the White House says, "radical climate policies, global governance and ideological programmes that conflict with US sovereignty and economic strength", along with "globalist agendas over US priorities".
Putting "global governance" itself in the crosshairs is particularly significant. There are many problems – and they are growing in number – that can only be solved through such a system, as they are cross-border and multinational in nature. Climate change is one of them. America's exit from the UNFCCC will be a blow to diplomatic efforts to rally developing countries towards future climate agreements. A dozen other sustainability-related initiatives are also affected.
There is no question many multilateral organisations need reform. But there is also no doubt that international efforts to combat climate change are needed. And US territories, agriculture and livelihoods are as vulnerable to the effects of global warming as anywhere.
No country is an island – even the ones that are. Mr Trump, who has delighted in his reputation for ending wars and acting as "dealmaker-in-chief", knows this well. What is the international system if not a series of deals in the service of peace? Indeed, such deals are vital for the world and all of its nation-states.
