Page 82 - AEI Insights 2018 Vol 4 Issue 1

AEI Insights, Vol 4, Issue 1, 2018

Given all this, the big question remains: Without US support, what will be the fate of the Paris
Climate Agreement? Which country will now take the lead?

The Paris Climate Agreement (Paris 2015, or CoP 21, CMP11), within UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), is an unprecedented global effort in combating
the deleterious effects of climate change. The agreement opened for signing on 22 April 2016
and has been since signed by 195 nations and ratified by 148 as of June 2017.

While global greenhouse gas emissions have increased manifold since the 1900s, carbon
emissions alone have risen by 90% since the 1970s. The fallout from these emissions has
resulted in thinning of polar ice, rising sea levels, global warming, and unpredictable weather
conditions, leading to incalculable economic and health risks. China and USA are among the
highest polluting nations, contributing about 38% collectively to global greenhouse emissions.
The Paris effort is intended to limit global warming to under 2% above pre-industrial levels by
gradually cutting down on carbon emissions and ultimately heading towards a 0% carbon
emission. Utilization of other forms of renewable and clean energy such as solar, wind,
geothermal energy is central to the idea.

US has now joined the league of just 2 other nations – Syria and Nicaragua - that have not
signed the accord. The US’s exit may be an opportunity for other countries to come together
more closely. But this has to be cautiously undertaken; in the past, the US has provided firm
and definite leadership in major world matters. The US is one of the largest contributors to the
Green Climate Fund, and its exit would surely hurt the budget of USD 100 billion per year
promised by the developed world to the developing (especially the least developed) nations.
Thus, global effort is likely to be severely hampered due to the US pull-out.

In the absence of US, the China is now expected to play a more dominant role. However, China
is the world’s largest polluter and is still a developing nation. The world cannot have much
hope that China, in terms of contribution to the Fund, would manage to singlehandedly fill the
void. However, a close EU-China climate change alliance is in the works now and together
they might fill the void. The US exit also affords China an opportunity to exert more world
influence, which it has bolstered further with its OBOR and other initiatives. The ASEAN itself
is unlikely to make any sudden moves. A shift in power centrality towards China may be good
news to the ASEAN, which has been over the past few years strengthening its relations with
China, and is likely to look to China for leadership (w.r.t. Climate) in the region.

The exit does not mean that US would manage to immediately free itself from the arrangement.
Should any country wish to opt out, the accord requires it to remain in the pact for 3 years and
then additional 1 year before they can finally exit. Hence, it won’t be until 2020 that the US
finally gets out. In case the leadership changes in the next US elections, scheduled in 2020, the
equation may again change, so it’s still a wait-and-see situation.

Trump is treading a dangerous path; his protectionist policy is isolating the US from the rest of
the world. The exit of the US from the accord would bring a setback to multilateralism as well.
The US since the 1940s has led the world through multilateralism in matters of peace and
security, trade, human rights, and environmental protection. These have brought immense
benefits in the form of a successful international economy. Trump’s “America first” policy
cannot succeed unless it is interwoven with the shared values of this highly interconnected
world. The US exit has nonetheless shaken the system, and only time will tell if the resolve
gets stronger or if greater cracks in governance emerge.

82