Climate treaty exit draws criticism
The withdrawal from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change drew attention from climate advocates and scientists. The UNFCCC is the 1992 agreement among 198 countries that provides the legal foundation for climate finance commitments to developing nations and serves as the underlying treaty for the Paris climate accord. Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement shortly after reclaiming the White House.
Gina McCarthy, former White House National Climate Adviser and co-chair of America Is All In — a coalition of climate-concerned U.S. states and cities — called the UNFCCC withdrawal “shortsighted, embarrassing, and a foolish decision.”
“This Administration is forfeiting our country’s ability to influence trillions of dollars in investments, policies, and decisions that would have advanced our economy and protected us from costly disasters wreaking havoc on our country,” McCarthy said in a statement.
Rob Jackson, a Stanford University climate scientist who chairs the Global Carbon Project — a group of scientists that tracks countries’ carbon dioxide emissions — said U.S. withdrawal could impede global climate progress. Without cooperation from the U.S., one of the world’s largest emitters and economies, experts said meaningful reductions in greenhouse gases would be difficult to achieve. The withdrawal “gives other nations the excuse to delay their own actions and commitments,” Jackson said.
Mainstream scientists say climate change is behind increasing instances of extreme weather events, including flooding, droughts, wildfires, intense rainfall, and dangerous heat.
Selective engagement going forward
Despite the broad scope of Wednesday’s withdrawals, administration officials said the U.S. would continue engaging with U.N. standard-setting bodies where there is competition with China — citing the International Telecommunications Union, the International Maritime Organization, and the International Labor Organization — and would direct taxpayer money toward expanding American influence in those areas.
The administration has also taken what officials described as an à la carte approach to U.N. dues overall, funding operations and agencies considered aligned with the administration’s priorities while declining to support others.
Other organizations the U.S. will exit under the order include the Carbon Free Energy Compact, the United Nations University, the International Cotton Advisory Committee, the International Tropical Timber Organization, the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, the Pan-American Institute for Geography and History, the International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies, and the International Lead and Zinc Study Group.
U.N. Population Fund
The U.N. Population Fund, which provides sexual and reproductive health services worldwide, has long drawn Republican opposition. Trump and other GOP officials have accused the agency of participating in “coercive abortion practices” in countries including China, and Trump cut funding for it during his first term. President Joe Biden restored funding when he took office in January 2021. A State Department review conducted the following year found no evidence to support the claims.
Many independent nongovernmental agencies — including some that work with the United Nations — have reported project closures resulting from the administration’s earlier decision to slash foreign assistance through the U.S. Agency for International Development.