Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the United States will begin the "formal process" to withdraw from the agreement that fights climate change .
Donald Trump speaking at a press conference. / Photo: Wikimedia / Gage Skidmore
LatinAmerican Post | Juliana Suárez
Escucha este artículo
Leer en español: Trump se despide del Acuerdo de París
Since he began his presidency, Donald Trump showed little interest and much discontent in what had to do with the Paris Agreement, signed in 2016 and which entered into force in November of that year.
In June 2017, the US president had already stated that he would withdraw from the agreement. However, this could not be done until 3 years after the treaty entered into force. According to ABC, if a country withdrew before these three years “it would be subject to its legally binding procedural commitments. If you break them, it would violate International Law. ”
This date is fulfilled in November 2019, so the announcement made by Pompeo is not a surprise to member countries or to the world. The withdrawal process lasts approximately one year from the date you formally request.
Today we begin the formal process of withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. The U.S. is proud of our record as a world leader in reducing all emissions, fostering resilience, growing our economy, and ensuring energy for our citizens. Ours is a realistic and pragmatic model.— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) November 4, 2019
What Trump did not like
The Paris Agreement, signed by 195 countries under the UN Convention on Climate Change, creates the need for countries to commit to reducing threats to climate change, especially with the production of greenhouse gases. As a goal, it seeks to keep the global average temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius.
For this, countries must commit themselves taking into account the level of gases produced by their companies so that financial flows that have compatibility with the environment were also located. This last point was the one of greatest disgust for the president and magnate of the United States.
The control of financial flows would mean a brake on the production of companies and countries such as the United States or China would be more affected than smaller ones and with smaller industries. Although this was created in order to reduce emissions, it would also affect the performance of the affected sectors. According to the BBC, "the agreement approved in the French capital is a massive redistribution of US wealth to other countries," so it can be considered a competitive threat that would affect the growth of the North American country.
In addition to his clear position against the Paris Agreement, which was also criticized for breaching and not compromising from the beginning, President Trump has also been known for his controversial statements that deny the existence of climate change.
The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 6, 2012
From before even knowing that he would launch the presidency, even during his campaign and even during his presidential term, Donal Trump has assured that climate change is an invention of the enemies of the United States (more specifically of China) to affect growth from the country. He has also referred to global warming as "nonsense" (bullshit). Recently he has even mocked Greta Thunberg, the young climate change activist who has traveled the world with her initiatives, with a tweet that included an ironic comment about her presentation to the UN.
She seems like a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future. So nice to see! https://t.co/1tQG6QcVKO— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 24, 2019
What does the agreement mean that the US is no longer?
Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement represents mostly a political message, even though his position against him has long been known. The strategy of the Nation, rather than trying to sink or finish it, is to show the world the power that the United States still has and set precedents for its decisions.
At one time, in 2017 when the withdrawal was first announced, it was believed that perhaps that movement could affect the decision of other countries. This was believed because other G20 countries such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey, among others, had also been criticized for not complying with emission reductions.
Likewise, according to National Geographic, “Trump's decision could undermine the pace of climate progress, making other countries decide to stop fulfilling their own commitments, limiting the ability of the United States to guide the debate and giving up the jobs and economic benefits of an ongoing energy revolution to countries like China. ” However, he mentions that the shift towards clean energy is already happening and countries, especially in Europe, are increasingly aware of it.
In 2017, when the United States made the announcement for the first time, Teresa Ribera, director of the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), said for ABC that "if the others remain firm - G-20 minus the US ., and the fundamental actors of American society (states, cities, businesses, and citizens) - the effect is relatively limited. "
The announcement of the United States had, rather, a negative impact on the international community and the civilian population, which little by little has become more concerned with the environment. Because of this growing concern, hand in hand with dozens of political and civil activists, the rejection of the Agreement is not well stopped.
Internally, the decision does affect the North American country, because when leaving the Agreement, it is left without a clear environmental policy, which “is alarming,” according to Thinking Heads.
The purpose of the United States since the Agreement began was to achieve better conditions for its country so that it would not be affected by the "quotas" imposed on it. Therefore, the country could be expected to try again to engage in the fight against climate change, but with better benefits and less impact on its industries.