American President Donald Trump announced his country’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement on June 1. It seems like the US voluntarily abandoned its leading role in the international arena after it had been the driving force behind reaching a consensus among developed and developing countries in the past few years.
Meanwhile, international and local American condemnations indicate that the international community is aware of the importance of reducing carbon emissions and taking practical measures to achieve this aim. All this makes the American administration’s stance looks like it’s swimming against the current on the local and foreign fronts.
It is difficult to specify how withdrawing from the agreement will affect the American economy and the Paris Climate Agreement’s goals to globally reduce carbon emissions. However, the credibility of Trump’s administration as an international partner and ally has decreased. The door is thus widely open for other countries and powers to take the lead, either on their own or in partnership with others, and assume international leadership in this pivotal case that may eventually lead to reforming the balance of power in the international system in general.
Withdrawal Claims
Regarding the Paris Climate Agreement, Trump’s logic is based on insisting on “alternative facts” or stances that seem opposing truth and reality. For instance, Trump underestimated the importance of committing to the agreement and said the latter’s influence is “very little.” This opposes scientific consensus that achieving the agreement’s desired aims – though it is not enough to halt the effects of climate change – is a necessary, indispensable move to save the world from the negative repercussions of climate change.
Meanwhile, the American president voiced his conviction of the importance of the US withdrawal from the agreement to spare his country the legal consequences if it does not commit to the agreement’s articles. This contradicts with the fact that the agreement is voluntary, and it does not stipulate any punitive measures against withdrawals. The agreement allows each state to specify how much it commits to decreasing carbon emissions. Therefore, Trump did not need to withdraw from the agreement if he wanted to alter the US’ commitments, which his country chose voluntarily under the former Obama administration.
Trump claims as well that committing to the agreement negatively affects the American economy as it loses several jobs due to environmental conditions, especially in the field of coal production. Note that the largest coal producing states represented Trump’s electoral base. However, in this regard, Trump has ignored several facts. For instance, the number of jobs, which the alternative energy sector provides in the US represents around three times the number of jobs provides by the coal production field, according to a study published by the US Department of Energy in 2016. Alternative energy is on the path of developing due to the world’s increasing interest to use it. The coal industry, however, is heading towards extinction due to several factors such as the availability of shale gas in the US as a cheaper and cleaner source of energy.
Domestic Opposition
Trump’ insistence on his stance regarding the climate agreement reflects the “nationalist” movement, which competes with other political movements that support openness and globalization. This division also extends to members of Trump’s circle.
It was no coincidence that Trump’s top aide Steve Bannon, who is viewed as the godfather of nationalism or what he calls “economic nationalism,” was at the forefront of figures attending Trump’s speech. Bannon believes that multilateral agreements came at the expense of American economic interests and that globalization has in general resulted in tangible economic losses.
This approach was welcomed by a wide base in the Republican Party, of which many members doubt climate change. It was also welcomed by several American social categories that were harmed by economic competition related to globalization and technological development, which relied on machines rather than labor force.
On the other hand, several segments within America’s society believe in climate change. This was perceived in the reactions, which followed America’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement from supporters of the agreement in Trump’s circle. These supporters include his own daughter, Ivanka, who called for not withdrawing from the agreement and personally communicated with a number of prominent American figures to propose their pro-agreement vision to the president. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson also supports the climate agreement.
Democrats, primarily former President Obama, are aware of the importance of addressing climate change. After the presidential elections were held on November 8, 2016, an opinion poll showed there is wide American support to preserve the environment by using alternative energy, as 85percent said they support using solar energy and wind power. The poll also showed that wide categories, with an average of 70 percent, support staying in the Paris Climate Agreement. Unlike Trump’s promises in his campaign to withdraw from the agreement, polls revealed that half of Trump’s supporters wanted to stay in the Paris Climate Agreement.
The most significant reaction was establishing a Climate Alliance, formed by a number of American cities, states and companies. It announced that the alliance is working on a plan to be submitted to the UN and in which it pledges that the US will uphold the Paris Climate Agreement and fulfill its requirements in terms of reducing carbon emissions, despite America’s official withdrawal from the agreement. The alliance includes three states, which are New York, Washington and California and 30 cities including Los Angeles, Atlanta and Pittsburgh. It is worth noting that ironically, during his speech announcing America’s withdrawal from the agreement, Trump said it was his duty to defend Pittsburgh’s and not Paris’ interests.
100 companies and 80 universities also joined the alliance. This reveals that leadership in terms of climate change is no longer only in the hands of the federal government’s level, but also controlled by local governments and the civil society.
On the level of states, 29 states have projects and commitments to use renewable energy in generating electricity. Many of them provide incentives and support to companies that reduce their emissions. California is the sixth largest economy in the world and one of the key parties in the field of climate. California aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent, which is below 1990 levels to be achieved by 2030. The state is also active on the global level as it concluded cooperation programs with China. Few days after the US announced withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, California’s Governor Jerry Brown was aiming to visit China to attend a conference about renewable energy.
As for major American companies, many of them have expressed their opposition of Trump’s decision. The most prominent ones are technology companies such as Tesla, Google, Facebook and Apple, which are well known for taking voluntary measures to decrease carbon emissions. One example is Facebook, which operates its data centers using wind turbines. The company aims to have 50 percent of its operations dependent on renewable and clean energy by 2018. In addition, Google is working to have all its operations, including data centers, completely powered on renewable energy this year (2017).
Among the companies, which voiced their opposition of America’s withdrawal from the agreement are major industrial companies such as General Electric, General Motors, Ford and Pepsi. Some major financial companies such as JPMorgran Chase also opposed the move. All these companies believe that committing to standards of reducing carbon emissions serves their interests.
On the economic level, the cost of clean energy is continuously decreasing. Furthermore, Companies’ negligence of carbon emission reduction’s standards harms their image and, in some cases, subjects them to penalties such as additional tariffs imposed by other countries. It also threatens the flow of foreign investment in sectors, which do not commit to international standards of the field. Accordingly, Multinational companies, especially automobile manufacturers like Ford and General Motors, will have to commit to other countries’ laws on carbon emissions if they want to compete in these countries’ markets.
Alternative Leaders
It is difficult to specify the effects of Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement on reducing carbon emissions in America or the world. However, there are indications that it will affect the international system, as Trump’s decision came few days after his visit to Europe where he met with NATO members and G7 leaders. Following these meetings, German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, spoke in an unprecedented honesty as she stated that Europe cannot rely on its partners like before and that it needs to depend on itself more. Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement confirmed this orientation as major European countries, Germany, France and Italy, issued a joint statement announcing their adherence to the agreement and rejected suggestions of negotiating over its articles.
Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron made separate strongly worded statements in this regard. European countries strongly defended the Paris Climate Agreement and said they will work on supporting it by communicating with other international parties. This came during meetings between Merkel and the prime ministers of India and China. The meetings were in the wake of Trump’s direct announcement to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Disputes regarding trade and other affairs between China and the EU are many and they obstructed issuing a joint statement; however, they strengthened promise to the Paris agreement.
There have been similar stances from different countries. Many rejected fears that the Paris agreement will collapse after the US withdrawal, and said that alternative leaders may emerge. While Europe quickly stepped forward to assume this task, some are talking about a G-6 to assume leadership.
China’s Rise
As the US announced withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement, many think that China has the opportunity to fill the gap. What supports this point of view is that Beijing has been stepping forward since Trump assumed power on January 20, 2017 and since he spoke about his protectionist policies regarding international. China’s President, Xi Jinping, voiced his country’s orientations during the speech he delivered at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2017. He also confirmed this at the One Belt, One Road Forum that was held in Beijing in May 2017. At the latter forum, China pledged to allocate massive amounts of money to invest in building the infrastructure in Asia and Africa and support economic growth and global commercial trade.
As protecting free trade is a direct interest for China, climate affairs has become vital to it as well. Unorganized manufacturing activity in the past decades resulted in high level of environmental, water and air pollution in China. These high levels threaten the safety and health of citizens, who repeatedly protested against this level of pollution. China also has direct economic interests as it is about to become a superpower in producing clean energy. There are 8 million jobs in the field of renewable energy across the world and 3.5 million jobs are in China, while the US’ share of these jobs is barely 1 million. The size of China’s foreign investments in this field is USD 32 billion, and on the domestic level, it invested USD 100 billion in this industry in 2015.
China is considered the biggest manufacturer of solar panels as five out of the six major companies in this field are in China. China has succeeded in decreasing the production cost of these panels by 30 percent this year. Therefore, Chinese achievements in this field as well as China’s bigger involvement in the international arena on the economic and political levels qualify it to have a leading role in combating climate change.
The bottom line is that the US withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement will have more negative effects on the domestic and global stance against the Trump administration, than on the future of the agreement itself. Whether a country or a group of countries step forward to lead climate affairs in the world, indicating the international system’s willingness to adapt with the Trump administration’s withdrawal tendencies. American companies, states and cities’ orientations to resume working with the world to address climate change via an approach that opposes the American administration’s shows that the economic and technological reality has developed in a way that hinders any backing down attempts.
At the time being, these interactions seem linked to one cause, which is climate change. It is expected that conflicts within this affair will expand and reflect the balance of power in the international system as a whole. There appears to be a bigger role for entities, such as states and global companies, apart from countries as a whole. Meanwhile rising powers like China are gaining more significance. The international system seeks to adjust with these transformations amid expected retreat and perhaps diplomatic isolation of the US under Trump’s administration.
