The United States' decision to withdraw from key international climate agreements represents a watershed moment in global climate governance. As historically the planet's biggest polluter Washington, with its isolation from international efforts to stop warming are being placed in an unprecedented position that raises concerns about the stability of the entire multilateral system.

Historical responsibility in numbers

The United States bears a greater historical responsibility for climate change than any other country or group of countries in the world. According to emissions analyses, the United States has emitted a total of 542 billion tons of carbon dioxide (GtCO2), which includes fossil fuel burning, deforestation and other industrial activities. This volume represents more than one-fifth (approximately 20 %) of all the emissions that humanity has released into the atmosphere over the last 175 years.

By comparison, China is second with 336 GtCO2 and Russia is third with 185 GtCO2. The disproportion of the US contribution to warming is even more striking when looking at population: although the US accounts for only 4 % of the world's population, its cumulative emissions per capita are seven times higher than China's and up to 25 times higher than in India. The US's historical emissions are even higher than the combined emissions of the 133 lowest-emitting countries, home to more than three billion people.

Executive Order 14162: "America First"„

On January 20, 2025, the very first day of his second term, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14162 entitled „Putting America First In International Environmental Agreements.“ This document ordered the immediate withdrawal of the US from the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

According to official information from the UN, Washington will officially leave the convention structures January 27, 2026. The move not only involves a formal withdrawal from diplomatic forums, but also an immediate end to all financial commitments under the UNFCCC, including a freeze on international climate aid funds. This is the second time the Trump administration has pulled a country out of the Paris Agreement, after the US rejoined the agreement in 2021 under the leadership of Joseph Biden.

Domestic politics in the sign of fossil fuels

The departure from climate goals is not just a diplomatic gesture, but is underpinned by a massive revision of domestic legislation. The key instrument is the law „One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB), passed in 2025, which repeals most of the clean energy and vehicle tax breaks introduced by the previous administration.

The main impacts of this policy include:

• Slowing down the transition to renewables: The OBBB is expected to halve installed wind and solar capacity by 2035.
• Return to coal and gas: The administration has repealed emissions standards for fossil fuel power plants and declared a „national energy emergency“ to accelerate extraction.
• EPA weakening: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed eliminating the legal basis for regulating greenhouse gases, which would mean the end of enforcement of emissions standards in transportation and industry.

These steps lead to the USA currently being rated as a country with „"critically deficient"“ approach to climate protection, which, if followed globally, would lead to a warming of 3°C to 4°C.

Global consequences and loss of leadership

The US absence from climate negotiations creates a serious power vacuum. China In this situation, China is confirming itself as a dominant industrial force in the energy transition, controlling more than 70 % of the world's lithium-ion battery production. However, its strategy is ambiguous, as it continues to approve massive construction of coal-fired power plants alongside the development of renewables. European Union is trying to maintain its role as a regulatory leader, but is encountering internal political instability and growing international competition.

The biggest concern is the threat to financial mechanisms. Without Washington's contribution, it is unlikely that the upcoming summit will COP30 in Belém fails to agree on robust targets for climate finance in vulnerable countries. This could lead to deepening disputes between developed and developing countries and an erosion of trust in international institutions.

Experts have called the move an „own goal“ that will hurt the US economy and national security at a time when extreme weather events like flooding and mega-storms are worsening. Former Vice President Al Gore has stressed that the administration has turned its back on science in favor of oil industry interests.

The US withdrawal from climate efforts is thus not just an isolated failure of environmental policy, but a symptom of a deeper crisis of multilateralism. If international agreements remain hostage to domestic political fluctuations, global coordination risks disintegrating into a fragmented patchwork of regional initiatives that are unable to confront a threat that transcends national borders. JRi

Metaphor for understanding the situation: Imagine the world’s climate as a large, shared ship with water flowing into it. The United States is the largest and most experienced officer, having drilled the most holes in the ship in the past. Instead of leading the crew in repairs now, they have decided to leave the bridge and declare their part of the ship safe, leaving the others without the necessary tools and coordination in the middle of the storm.