COP25: The (Republican) Elephant Not in the Room

COP25* is opening in Madrid. Without the United States, since Washington officially launched its exit procedure from the Paris Agreement on Nov. 4. Is it really so bad? For the climate: not quite sure. For the proper functioning of the planet: yes, without a doubt.

The news is not news. On Nov. 4 the United States notified the United Nations of its decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Donald Trump had announced it before his election, and confirmed it very quickly. There was no pleasant surprise. The world’s second largest emitter of greenhouses gases is withdrawing from an agreement to which it had made a significant contribution. Let’s remind ourselves of the key role of the agreement reached between Xi Jinping and Barack Obama a few months before COP21.* The image was beautiful. China and the United States − more than 40% of total emissions between them − moving forward together. That was four years ago. An eternity. The symbol is significant. For the climate, and for the world.

The withdrawal of the United States sends a strong and negative signal to the planet. A voice being raised to deny the evidence of climate change. It allows denial to persist and it feeds doubt. That’s the most serious thing.

We can see it even in the United States, where there is a deep division between Republicans and Democrats. Already in the campaign, the latter are discussing the “Green New Deal” and placing the environment and climate at the forefront of their concerns for the presidential election. Republicans, on the other hand, relegate these issues to the bottom of their agenda, and follow their president without batting an eye.

The Paris Agreement Is Not Dead

Does this mean that the Paris Agreement is dead? No; well, not for that reason alone. We must remember, the commitments were voluntary, and remain so. Many signatories are far from meeting these commitments. Four years later, we are way off. Paradoxically, this is not because of America. While the signatory states also have a role in climate policies, much actually depends on businesses, cities, on civil society. This is even truer in a country with a federal system. When Washington does less, and California, for example, does more, it is sued by Trump for that.

Trump’s decision to withdraw from the agreement does not, however, prevent many good people from acting. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former governor of California, summed it up as follows: “It is not the United States withdrawing from the agreement, but President Trump.”** And Americans who continue to mobilize will play a decisive role.

Withdrawal from the Multilateral System

But beyond the climate, the American withdrawal from the Convention of the Parties also becomes a new blow to the world order. The United States has embarked on a major movement to withdraw from the multilateral system and to challenge the rules that overly constrain it. Trade and climate are the most obvious fissures. But the list goes on. That handshake with the Chinese is no longer relevant. On that − and perhaps on only that − the Democrats and Republicans agree.

The Fahrenheit degree − which the United States is among the very last to use − is therefore becoming an instrument of measuring American aloneness. As the planet warms up, the world is likely to get colder.

*Editor’s note: Every year since 1995, countries that had adopted the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change have held a Convention of the Parties to further its objective of reducing greenhouse gases and combatting the effects of climate change.

**This quote, accurately translated, could not be verified, but the author may have been referring to Schwarzenegger’s remarks on Dec. 3, 2018 at COP24, when he said, “The United States is still in the Paris Agreement. Yes, we have a [crazy] leader in Washington that is not in, that is out.”