Trump pulls US out of UN climate treaty, IPCC and 64 other global bodies

The decision by the United States, under President Donald Trump, to withdraw from the UN climate treaty, specifically the Paris Agreement, marked a pivotal moment in global environmental politics. This move, announced on June 1, 2017, and formally taking effect on November 4, 2020, profoundly reshaped international efforts to combat climate change and raised significant questions about multilateralism.

To truly grasp the gravity of this withdrawal, we must first understand its background. International climate cooperation began earnestly with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992, signed at the Rio Earth Summit. This convention established the foundational principles, including ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities’ (CBDR-RC), acknowledging that developed nations, historically greater emitters, bear a larger responsibility. The Kyoto Protocol (1997) was the first legally binding agreement to set emission reduction targets for developed countries, but the US, despite signing, never ratified it, citing concerns about its economic impact and the lack of commitments from major developing economies like China and India.

This historical context led to the Paris Agreement in 2015, a landmark accord adopted by 196 parties at COP21. Unlike Kyoto, Paris adopted a 'bottom-up' approach, requiring all countries to submit Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) – voluntary, non-binding climate action plans. The agreement's universal nature and flexibility, allowing countries to set their own targets, garnered widespread support, including from the Obama administration in the US. The US pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025.

President Trump's decision to withdraw was rooted in his 'America First' policy and a belief that the agreement imposed an 'unfair economic burden' on the US, hindering its economy and job growth. He argued that the agreement was detrimental to American businesses and workers. The withdrawal meant the US would no longer negotiate as a Party at Conferences of the Parties (COPs), effectively removing itself from the formal emissions reporting and review system established under the agreement. Crucially, it also meant the US forfeited its ability to shape global climate rules from within these international forums. The article also mentions the US pulling out of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and 64 other global bodies, signaling a broader disengagement from multilateral institutions.

Key stakeholders in this event included the US government under Trump, which initiated the withdrawal; the United Nations and the UNFCCC, which serve as the framework for global climate action; the IPCC, the leading international body for assessing climate change science; and other nations, particularly the European Union, China, and India, which reiterated their commitment to the Paris Agreement. Within the US, many states, cities, and businesses, forming the 'We Are Still In' movement, pledged to continue meeting Paris Agreement goals despite the federal withdrawal.

For India, the US withdrawal carried significant implications. India, a major developing economy and a significant emitter, has a crucial role in global climate action. The absence of the US from the negotiating table could have put more pressure on countries like India to shoulder a greater burden, especially concerning climate finance and technology transfer, areas where the US was historically a major contributor. India’s own NDCs under the Paris Agreement aim to reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33-35% by 2030 from 2005 levels and achieve 40% cumulative electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuel-based energy resources by 2030. The US withdrawal, while not directly impacting India’s domestic commitments, could affect the global cooperative environment and access to green technologies. India has consistently advocated for CBDR-RC and emphasized the need for developed countries to provide financial and technological support to developing nations. The withdrawal also underscored the importance of India strengthening alliances with other committed nations, such as through initiatives like the International Solar Alliance (ISA).

From a broader perspective, this event highlighted the fragility of multilateral agreements and the tension between national sovereignty and global challenges. It also brought to the forefront the geopolitical shifts, with China and the EU stepping up their leadership roles in climate action in the absence of the US. The future implications were initially concerning, with fears that the withdrawal might encourage other nations to backtrack on their commitments. However, the global response largely reaffirmed the Paris Agreement, and the subsequent re-entry of the US under the Biden administration on January 20, 2021, demonstrated the enduring importance of international cooperation on climate change.

While the US withdrawal is an international event, India's commitment to environmental protection is enshrined in its own legal and policy framework. The **Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP)**, specifically **Article 48A**, mandates the State to 'endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.' Furthermore, **Article 51A(g)**, a **Fundamental Duty**, obligates every citizen 'to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures.' India's **Environmental Protection Act, 1986**, and its various policies like the **National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC)**, launched in 2008, demonstrate its domestic legislative and policy commitment to environmental governance, irrespective of international developments involving other nations.