Many nations at the United Nations are preparing for a vote on a draft climate resolution, but the Trump administration is pushing back by seeking Vanuatu’s withdrawal of the proposal, according to U.S. guidance shared with diplomats this week.
The U.S. government’s position, carried in a cable sent Tuesday and obtained by The Associated Press, urged other countries to press Vanuatu to withdraw the draft resolution that supports stronger climate action and includes an approach to reparations for damage tied to any nation’s failure to act.
In the State Department guidance issued to U.S. embassies and consulates abroad, the department said it “strongly objects” to the proposal being discussed by the U.N. General Assembly and that its adoption “could pose a major threat to U.S. industry,” the cable says.
The cable also framed the move as part of the Trump administration’s broader effort to distance the United States from climate change efforts, saying the administration views the U.N. and other nations as exaggerating climate change into what it characterizes as the world’s greatest threat.
The draft resolution is sponsored by Vanuatu, an island nation that fears for its survival as a result of climate change. Vanuatu’s draft is being circulated among the General Assembly’s 193 member states, and it stems from a landmark advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice last July, AP reported.
The International Court of Justice said countries could be in violation of international law if they fail to take measures to protect the planet from climate change. The court also said nations harmed by climate impacts could be entitled to reparations, even though the advisory opinion is not legally binding.
In language reflected in the draft, the resolution expresses determination to translate the ICJ’s findings into a framework for “concrete multinational action.” It calls on all nations and regional organizations to comply with their international-law obligations related to climate change, and it includes a range of measures, including adopting national climate action plans to limit global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius and phasing out subsidies for fossil fuel exploration, production and exploitation.
The proposal also includes an “International Register of Damage” intended to record evidence and claims, and it urges those determined to be in violation to “provide full and prompt reparation for damage,” AP reported. It also reflects a push to connect the court’s advisory conclusions to a practical pathway that General Assembly members would consider during U.N. deliberations.
Vanuatu’s U.N. Ambassador Odo Tevi said his country wants a vote on the resolution by the end of March, and he stressed that it would ensure that the clarity in the ICJ ruling “strengthens global climate action and multilateral cooperation.”
Outside the U.S. government’s objections, rights groups urged support for the draft. Louis Charbonneau, director of Human Rights Watch at the United Nations, urged support for the resolution Friday, saying governments should live up to their obligation to protect human rights around the world by protecting the environment.
Amnesty International climate justice researcher and legal adviser Candy Ofime said in a statement that the draft resolution attempts to turn the ICJ’s interpretation of key legal standards into a practical roadmap for state accountability and that it is likely to trigger political pushback from higher-income, high-emitting countries concerned about historical responsibility and financial liability.
According to the cable, the State Department’s plan is to tell other countries to urge Vanuatu to withdraw the draft from consideration by Friday, when informal consultations began, framing the draft as “even more problematic” than the ICJ opinion itself.
The cable further asserted that other Group of 7 economic powers as well as China, Saudi Arabia and Russia have indicated to the U.S. Mission to the U.N. that they share Americans’ concerns with “aspects” of the draft. It also uses the guidance as a talking point with representatives of other countries, describing the draft as part of what it characterizes as a pattern of using climate models to seek supposed legal obligations and to infer human rights obligations that it says states have not agreed to.