The United States will withdraw from the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, marking one of the first moves by the new administration of President Donald Trump. This is not the first time such a withdrawal has occurred—the U.S. previously exited the agreement during Trump’s prior term, although the accord was still in its early stages of implementation at that time.
This decision reaffirms the administration’s focus on energy production through fossil fuels, justified by the argument that increased oil and gas exploitation will reduce the high cost of living for citizens. This reasoning reflects the stance of the previous term, which viewed such agreements as unfavorable and as a drag on the economy. However, environmental experts warn that this pivot could significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions and hinder global efforts to combat climate change, given that the U.S. is one of the largest polluters.
As one of the wealthiest countries in the world, the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, much like in 2017, could impact other nations by reducing financial contributions to the Green Climate Fund, as current policies generally aim to cut climate-related expenditures.
Consequently, this decision calls into question previously set targets, such as the U.S. commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 61–66 percent by 2035 compared to 2005 levels—a goal that will now be unattainable under the new policies.
More:
- European People’s Party: Climate Goals Must Align with EU Industry Preservation
- The Battle for Dominance in Greenland – Are Energy Resources and the Arctic Path Shaping the Issue?
- The Future of the Labor Market – Green Transition at the Heart of Global Changes
Among the latest executive orders, measures from the previous administration have been rolled back, including bans on oil drilling in the Arctic and certain coastal areas. This opens the door for accelerated exploration of new oil and gas fields, alarming environmental groups. They argue that drilling, extraction, and subsequent use of these fuels will intensify climate change, with shrinking permanent ice and rising sea levels as ongoing consequences.
As previously reported, this shift also raises questions about the U.S.’s geopolitical influence in the Arctic, particularly following the president’s statements on the need to „acquire Greenland”. Greenland, a gateway to the Arctic, is rich in resources, energy reserves, and minerals, many of which remain largely untapped due to the presence of permanent ice. However, as glaciers thin, access to potentially abundant energy reserves becomes easier. For the U.S., interest in Greenland could represent a long-term strategic move to secure a stronger position in the Arctic race with other nations and enhance energy stability while gaining greater control over key maritime passages.
The U.S. withdrawal from climate agreements is already prompting a reevaluation of global strategies. Some countries, such as Argentina, have announced plans to revise their climate agendas, according to international media reports. The concern lies in the ripple effect of U.S. policies on other nations, potentially weakening international cooperation in combating climate change, particularly among major polluters whose policies do not align with such agreements.
Energy portal
