Climate Summit Atmosphere: US President's No-Show Considered Preferable Than a US Disruptive Force

Historically, international governments encouraged the America to collaborate in tackling the global warming. Now, as major UN climate talks take place in the host country, several states are quietly hoping that the US does not participate.

During the administration of President Trump, who has referred to the climate crisis as “the biggest hoax ever imposed on the planet,” the United States has not only stepped away from emission reductions but has also actively promoted greater international reliance on hydrocarbons and encouraged other countries to scrap their environmental regulations.

“Should you fail to escape from this eco-hoax, your state is going to collapse,” President Trump told world leaders during a international forum in September. “You need strong borders and traditional energy sources if you are going to be successful in the future.”

A sense of reassurance spread among some diplomats when American government confirmed that no senior officials would participate in the climate summit in Belém, Brazil this week. “President Trump will not endanger our country’s economic and security interests to pursue vague climate goals that are harming other countries,” a US representative said.

US Engagement to Global Warming Efforts: From Indifference to Active Opposition

US dedication to limit temperature rise has varied in recent decades, but the US now appears not only apathetic but publicly resisting environmental action. “Before, it was passive disregard, even during the initial Trump administration,” noted a former senior state department official. “Now it’s a different story. They avoid involvement and don’t want others to, either.”

“If the choice is American absence or a United States playing a destructive role, to sabotage and hinder things, then it is believed the majority of nations would prefer American absence,” the former official added. “I mean, America stands to the right of Saudi Arabia, when you think about it. The Saudis negotiate hard but they are OK with the Paris climate accord. They aren’t against the word ‘climate change’.”

Global Reactions and Past Precedents

Trump was not, as expected, participating in a international gathering held recently as a curtain raiser for the climate summit, although the US president cast a shadow over the summit, with the leaders of Colombia and Chile accusing him of falsehoods for his dismissal of global warming.

The US position on global warming has hit a nadir, more antagonistic than during earlier presidency or under George W Bush, when the United States refused to approve the Kyoto climate treaty, according to a former US climate negotiator who served as a top environmental diplomat for the United States during the Obama administration.

“The president has made it clear he intends to exit from the Paris accord, so it doesn’t surprise me they aren’t sending anyone because they have disengaged in this,” Stern commented. “It is unlikely their presence would contribute any positive input. We are facing a much more aggressive government currently, in all areas.”

Recent Conflicts and Disruptive Tactics

Any kind of US presence at the Belém talks could have repeated unprecedented events seen when countries gathered in London weeks ago to formally approve plans for a modest fee on carbon output from shipping.

American delegates at the talks were alleged to have used coercive methods to compel nations to scrap the plan, apparently issuing threats of higher fees for docking in United States docks and even entry limitations upon entry into the United States for delegates and their families. The US leader had described the plan a “international eco-hoax charge on maritime trade” and insisted it be stopped. Such strategies were successful, with the environmental charge now postponed for no sooner than next year.

“The impact would have been a microscopic effect on the US economy, notably compared to US trade disputes, and however they employed full thug tactics to block the measure at the eleventh hour,” said a Democratic senator.

Present American Strategy and International Shifts

Even though the United States is improbable to participate in the host nation at all – the US diplomatic division that handled climate issues is now shuttered and there was American absence at international environmental talks in Europe and then South America this annual cycle – the official said countries should still be cautious of an “coercive approach” from the American leadership at the Belém conference, perhaps against a Brussels initiative to charge products based on the level of carbon emissions they produce.

“In my view should nations yield to pressure by the US government, they will take advantage of every opportunity that is offered, and then come back for more,” he commented. “Only if you stop and fight and oppose that there is hope.”

Adopting an unapologetic “drill, baby, drill” approach, the president has negotiated individual deals to increase oil and gas output with states such as Japan and South Korea, as well as extracting a promise from the Bloc to increase imports of US oil and gas.

Brussels’ green policies have been targeted by the US administration, as have renewable energy projects in the UK. “Wind power is rejected because wind is a disaster,” Trump declared during a public appearance with the UK leader in September. “It’s a very expensive joke, frankly.”

Global Progress and Irreversible Trends

Although the US leader has scrapped climate policies and stopped clean power initiatives in the US, it will not prevent the energy switch worldwide. Countries across the planet are expected to develop nearly 4,600 gigawatts of {clean power|renewable energy|green electricity