America Is the Renegade!

The American president instituted a period of disdain for his allies instead of his opponents during his first encounter on the international stage with his simple and fickle decision to withdraw from the climate treaty, or Paris climate agreement, as it is called. The countries that were party to the agreement were surprised by the timing and content of the American decision, even though the reactions themselves were predictable. To a large extent, this was reflected in the wide disparity among the states’ plans and their actions, as some of them were astonished, while some reacted with disbelief.

The real issue is that previous warnings have come true. The current American administration and the political promises it made triggered storms during the election and then during the first months in the White House. By withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement, the U.S. spurred a political hurricane that may provoke a global confrontation because President Trump’s decision puts America’s international role at stake. Because of this, the next few years will test existing political alliances which will be rearranged one by one, thus posing further challenges to trust in partnerships.

It may be premature to determine what the consequences will be by what has happened so far, as this is only the tip of the iceberg, and the future is further obscured by other conflicting interests. These conflicting interests intersect to form the core dilemma that will govern the international scene and are further evidence of the coming confrontation. Trump’s decision will not only generate debate over climate, but the impact of America’s withdrawal will extend to other more complex and decisive issues that will push international relations to a boiling point and could have all sorts of consequences, including deferred agreements and changes to rules, parties, and even geographical and strategic positions.

If domestic opposition to America’s withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement is comparable to international opposition, then the Trump administration’s search for a different leadership role on the international stage is inconsistent with the previous administration’s approach. Trump is instead emphasizing a unilateral approach. Facing a series of self-inflicted domestic problems, some of which are currently growing in magnitude and threaten to blow up, this administration’s strategy is reflected in Trump’s domestic policy. However, this has hindered the domestic agenda, exemplified by the failure to pass legislation that would give Trump a second term in the White House.

As the facts become clearer, the world faces consequences that move us closer to the pre-emptive strike strategy permissible under American policy. Thus, there is evidence to suggest that the next battlefront will involve testing those internal and external wars. This leads one to conclude that President Trump’s administration is not in an easy position with so many choices, but will find itself in a defensive position across the board. This increases the chances of an American-initiated war in reaction ordinary criticism, and moreover, internal and external threats which could lead to war, even if such threats were hypothetical.

In this context, American carelessness in its search for a new role amid a world order that is being eroded by traditional actors and threatened by emerging forces is more dangerous. The issue is not only the abandonment of its political and legal responsibility, but also the impact of the administration’s shocking statements which reflect excess power and brutality, and which indicate destructive tendencies. As most of these statements are ill-natured, they threaten to prolong and spread the sickness of the American model.

The American withdrawal from the climate treaty, the bluster of leaving, and accompanying competitive attitude of the administration are not understood as unrelated or shocking positions to many nations. Rather, the U.S. withdrawal from the climate treaty represents a natural shift away from many of the ways America has approached matters and is shrouded in its ambitions of domination and hegemony. It is this that governs the American mind, subject to a system of competition and trade, and its attempt to run the world through a market system. In this context, countries are merely regional agents, and these principles apply to allies and rivals alike because of the laws of profit and loss. This system forces complete submission to American dominance, despite other countries’ feeble attempts to refute it.