{"id":36509,"date":"2017-06-03T12:13:35","date_gmt":"2017-06-03T02:13:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/?p=36509"},"modified":"2019-04-16T13:31:07","modified_gmt":"2019-04-16T03:31:07","slug":"under-trump-us-goes-rogue-in-leaving-parisagreement-reports-takvera","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/under-trump-us-goes-rogue-in-leaving-parisagreement-reports-takvera\/","title":{"rendered":"Under Trump US goes rogue in leaving #ParisAgreement reports @takvera"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"
\nThis article was originally published<\/a> at Climate Action Moreland by John Englart, who has attended COP21 and COP22 as an NGO observer.<\/em><\/p>\n

President Trump has announced the United States withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, but says he is also open to a renegotiation. Germany, France, Italy<\/a> and other nations say that the Paris Agreement is a framework agreement and is structured in such a way that it is not open to renegotiation.<\/p>\n

The announcement brought condemnation from many world leaders<\/a>, negotiators and civil society. British journalist George Monbiot described it<\/a> as a crime against humanity.<\/p>\n

The UNFCCC Secretariat released a statement<\/a> saying it was ready to engage in dialogue with the United States government regarding the implications of their announcement, but was emphatic that renegotiation was not an option: <\/p>\n

“The Paris Agreement remains a historic treaty signed by 195 Parties and ratified by 146 countries plus the European Union. Therefore it cannot be renegotiated based on the request of a single Party.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Under this agreement each country sets their own targets and action plan (Nationally Determined Contributions). There are no formal penalties for a country not meeting it’s own target. While there is a formal expectation that over time countries would increase their NDC, if a country went backwards with it’s NDC there are zero penalties. <\/p>\n

Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a four year process. Trump chose this pathway rather than withdrawal from the UNFCCC which would be a more radical option but would only take one year. <\/p>\n

In many ways, as Luke Kemp argues at the Conversation<\/em><\/a>, it would be much easier if Trump had chosen for the US to quit the UNFCCC, which would preclude continuing obstruction. <\/p>\n

Withdrawal from Paris Agreement means the US will continue to have a seat at the negotiations over the next four years, with the ability to veto and obstruct negotiation processes, such as the development of the Paris Agreement rulebook due to be finalised at COP24 in 2018. <\/p>\n

The US only sent a team of 7 to the recent Bonn inter-sessional climate negotiations, with no instructions on direction. Those negotiators, as they had no new instructions, were coasting on the Obama administration directions. We will need to watch whether the Trump regime plays a low key roll or an active obstructionist role at future UNFCCC negotiations. As they have announced intention to withdraw there may be a little more latitude to deprecate US positions as part of consensus negotiations.<\/p>\n

The world did bend over backwards during negotiations at COP21 to ensure this agreement suited the US. Remember that last minute hiccup between using the words ‘should’ and ‘shall’<\/a> in the final text in the final hours?<\/p>\n

Almost certainly US withdrawal will stimulate more diplomatic leadership from Europe and China. I doubt we will see other countries following the USA. The Paris Agreement is, after all, just the tip of the ice berg in a global economic and energy transition already well under way, including in the USA.<\/p>\n

Withdrawal from Paris is also likely to increase the resolve at state and city level and the grassroots in the USA to continue with zero carbon development and roll out of renewables. 61 US cities and three states have vowed to uphold Paris climate agreement<\/a>. I suspect this is just the tip of the ice berg in climate resistance. <\/p>\n

In particular: California, Washington and New York are establishing a formal alliance of states to uphold the Paris Accord. Michael Bloomberg, former mayor of New York, is active in putting together an alliance of states, cities, universities and businesses<\/a> to undertake to meet the US climate commitment, with a submission to the UNFCCC. The problem is non-state submissions aren’t currently recognised in UNFCCC formal processes.<\/p>\n

One hopes there will also be an electoral backlash at the 2018 mid term congressional elections. We’ll have to wait and see on that.<\/p>\n

The Paris Agreement still has momentum and endorsement by most nations and can cope with US withdrawal. As I said at the end of COP22 in Marrakech, there is still strong momentum for climate action and momentum to move forward, globally and within the USA.<\/p>\n