Trump announces his slam on the Paris Agreement against climate change

Donald Trump fulfilled on Monday what he promised since he was still a candidate for the White House and notified the United Nations of his decision to abandon the Paris Agreement, a commitment of almost 200 countries against the climate crisis that has lost the first world power. The US president had announced his intention to break with that consensus as early as June 1, 2017, when he had not even been in the White House for six months, and has formalized it just the first day that he was allowed under the rules of the pact. The effective exit, however, cannot take place until November 2020, that is, just after the US presidential elections, which still leaves a waiting loophole for the UN.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo communicated the measure this afternoon and tried to convey that Washington was indeed committed to the climate crisis, only at its own pace, in its own way, a definition as “realistic.” “Today we begin the formal process of withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. The United States is proud of its track record as a world leader in reducing emissions, driving resilience, growing our economy and ensuring energy supplies for our citizens,” he said on his Twitter account, defending that the American was a “realistic and pragmatic” model.

So far, the Trumpist model has meant a setback in the environmental policies promoted by the previous Administration, of democrat Barack Obama: it also reversed dozens of environmental orders and programs promoted by Obama: from the elimination to the protections of offshore drilling (that is, part of the inland waters to extract oil); to the elimination of controls on methane emissions in oil and gas wells, through the reduction of the protection of threatened species, among others.

No measure, however, of such political and global impact as the slamming of the door to the Paris Pact, reached in 2015, with Obama at the head of the demonstration, although it has not yet occurred de facto. It is hard to imagine the success of such a multilateral agreement without the involvement of the largest economy in the world, although it has not resulted in a disbandment of other governments, a more than reasonable fear when the Republican announced his decision to break up in June 2017.

Up to 185 countries have already ratified it and have presented plans to cut their greenhouse gas emissions, as specified in the pact. Roughly speaking, the plans of each government must meet the objective that the global increase in temperature does not exceed by the end of the century the threshold of two degrees with respect to pre-industrial levels. There is nothing easy about this roadmap, with or without U.S. support: since 2015, when the Paris pact was signed, global emissions have increased.

From 2020, the date on which the Kyoto Protocol expires. It is expected that the emission reduction measures committed by the signatory states of the agreement will begin to be implemented. The United States, which has already distanced itself from Kyoto under the administration of George Bush Jr., opts for the same path and with a similar argument: the economy.

Trump behaved during the 2016 election campaign as a climate change denier, going so far as to call it a “hoax” created by China to curb the economic growth of the United States, which is the world’s second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases. When he announced his withdrawal two years ago, he avoided that incendiary path and justified his decision with economic arguments, assuring that the requirements established for the Americans, with respect to other countries, were harmful. “This agreement has little to do with the climate and more to do with other countries taking advantage of the United States. It’s a punishment for America. China can raise its emissions, in the face of the restrictions we have imposed on ourselves,” the president said.

The effective exit of any signatory can only take place four years after its entry into force, which began in November 2016. That leaves the real departure of Washington for after its elections, leaving it at the mercy of a possible change of political color in the White House. A string of cities and states of progressive governments have put themselves at the forefront of the climate fight while their federal administration goes in the opposite direction.

Source: The Country