Trump Exits the Paris Climate Accord (Again)
On Jan. 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement. This marks the second time he has withdrawn, the first being in 2020, which made the U.S. the first nation among nearly 200 participants to leave the accord. Before discussing the implications of Trump leaving the accord, it’s important to understand the purpose and goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.
The Paris Climate Agreement is a legally binding international treaty aimed at combating climate change. All the participants in the treaty have the shared goal of limiting “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.”
What are some ways countries plan to reach that goal?
Nationally Determined Contributions: A mandatory submission for each country to detail the actions they will take to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the goal of the Paris Climate Agreement.
Financial and Technical Support: Developed countries are to provide financial and technical assistance under Article 9 of the accord, with the overall goal of mobilizing $100 billion per year collectively for developing countries to reduce and adapt to climate change.
Enhancement of Greenhouse Gas “Sinks” through Sustainable Forest Management: In Article 5, countries are encouraged to adopt sustainable forest management practices that preserve forest as greenhouse gas “sinks.” These are natural systems that absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than they release.
Why did Trump withdraw and what’s next?
Trump justified his withdrawal from the agreement by citing concerns over the “economic burden” imposed on American workers and businesses. This aligns with his long-standing rhetoric of deregulation in environmental policy.
Trump has been adamant about using natural resources in the U.S for energy independence. In 2017, Trump described the agreement as putting the U.S at a disadvantage financially, citing an example of coal jobs being taken out of the U.S.
“In short, the agreement doesn’t eliminate coal jobs, it just transfers those jobs out of America and the United States, and ships them to foreign countries,” Trump said. “The agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States.”
At the Davis World Economic Forum 2025, Trump expressed his opinion on the Green New Deal, an environmental policy framework focused on the transformation of the economy to tackle inequality and climate change, as a “Green New Scam” and the Paris Climate Accords as “one-sided.”
Trump has not wasted any time in showing his position when it comes to the usage of fossil fuels, declaring a national energy emergency executive order and pledging to “drill, baby, drill.” This gives the administration the power to enhance the development and distribution of domestic fossil fuels.
“The United States has the potential to use its unrealized energy resources domestically and to sell international allies and partners a reliable, diversified, and affordable supply of energy,” Trump said.
Environmental Concerns
The deregulation of environmental policies and the withdrawal of the Paris Climate Accords have left many environmental groups preparing for a fight against Trump. An organization called Alaska Wilderness League has condemned another one of Trump’s executive orders, titled “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential,” calling it a “reckless new direction.”
The fight is led by Andy Moderow, senior director of policy at Alaska Wilderness League, who states that Trump is only intent on taking environmental concerns backward.
“President Trump’s inaugural address and first-day actions make it clear: he’s fixated on dragging our nation’s energy and public land policy backwards,” Moderow said.
Severe weather events are only going to be exacerbated by climate change. But what does that mean? We could see more hurricanes like Ian, Helen and Milton, which have been battering Florida; worsening wildfires like the ones in California; and other heatwaves and droughts that have been happening around the globe.
Now, more than ever, it has become critical to assess whether our elected officials are implementing effective measures to address this escalating crisis. The intensification of these events underscores the urgent need to evaluate our preparedness and effectiveness in mitigating both the current impacts of climate change and the potential catastrophes that lie ahead.
