World worried about Trump’s ‘scorched earth approach’

UK’s Guardian reports that governments around the world are worried about US President Trump’s removal of environmental protections and are concerned he will pull the US out of the Paris climate agreement.

Worried world urges Trump not to pull out of Paris climate agreement

Donald Trump’s scorched-earth approach to environmental protections has shocked current and former government officials overseas who are waiting nervously to see whether the US will destabilize the Paris climate agreement by pulling out of the deal.

The Guardian has spoken to a number of officials from key countries before Trump makes a decision on the Paris agreement this month. Trump’s announcement might come as early as this week.

The administration is now mulling whether the US should stay in the Paris climate agreement, a landmark deal struck by nearly 200 nations to lower greenhouse gas emissions that was ratified last year. Trump has previously promised to “cancel” the deal, but his advisers are reportedly split over whether quitting the compact would be worth the resulting diplomatic fallout.

Erik Solheim, UN environment chief:

Last week a senior UN official warned the US would suffer economically if it chooses to pull out of Paris, citing the clean energy jobs that will be created as countries decarbonize their electricity sources. “There is no doubt where the future is and that is what all the private sector companies have understood. The future is green. Obviously if you are not a party to the Paris agreement, you will lose out. And the main losers of course will be the people of the United States itself because all the interesting, fascinating new green jobs would go to China and to the other parts of the world that are investing heavily in this.”

Izabella Teixeira, former Brazilian environment minister:

“Trump’s actions on the climate are worrying. Although it is still too early to be sure what his strategy is for the US, the signs so far of backsliding are a concern to anyone who was involved in the long process that lead up to the Paris agreement,” said the veteran negotiator, who was credited with a key role in securing the international deal in 2015.

Fijian Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama…

…has written to Trump to urge him to stay within the Paris agreement. Bainimarama will officially head the UN climate change talks taking place in Bonn, Germany in November. “Climate change is not a hoax. it is frighteningly real,” Bainimarama told a conference in Melbourne. “Billions of people are losing the ability to feed themselves. Don’t let the whole side down by leaving, just when we have a game plan.”

Hilda Heine, the president of the Marshall Islands said…

she was “extremely disappointed to see the United States seeking to roll back its efforts to reduce emissions. My country’s survival depends on every country delivering on the promises they made in Paris. Our own commitment to it will never waiver.”

Ramón Méndez, former head of Uruguay’s climate policy( who was among those who hammered out the Paris agreement in 2015):

“I’m very worried by what is happening in the US regarding climate change. It was an extraordinarily strong shock to hear that Trump has signed a decree to revise the clean power plan. Of all of Trump’s policies, this is the one with the worst consequences for the world.”

Perhaps there are many countries that support a US withdrawal from the Paris agreement.

6 Comments

  1. The Paris climate agreement was NOT about lowering emissions. Two of the three biggest emitters, China and India, were going to possibly reduce their rate of increase over the next twenty years. There was still going to be a significant increase overall.
    The main purpose of Paris was for the west to pay money to the rest of the world. Now the potential receivers see the gravytrain going, they are getting upset and giving their sob story to the Guardian. Surprise Surprise.

    • David

       /  May 8, 2017

      “The main purpose of Paris was for the west to pay money to the rest of the world. Now the potential receivers see the gravytrain going, they are getting upset and giving their sob story to the Guardian. Surprise Surprise.”

      Exactly. It was nothing more than a neo-Marxist stitch up.

  2. chrism56

     /  May 8, 2017

    And before the alarmists of the blogosphere get all hot and bothered about my comments about Paris accord, here are three blog articles from the consensus side of the argument showing emissions will increase.
    http://energyandcarbon.com/transparency-of-paris-climate-agreement-is-in-doubt/
    http://www.crystolenergy.com/after-paris-climate-deal-major-changes-are-still-a-long-way-off-2/
    http://www.dw.com/en/tallying-up-the-climate-pledges-how-close-are-current-indcs-to-reaching-the-2-degree-goal/a-18691122

  3. “Billions of people are losing the ability to feed themselves.”

    What utter nonsense. Food production has vastly increased since the 1970s, during a period where the global climate has indeed warmed.

    Aside from the reality we see before our very eyes of millions of people being lifted out of poverty and a reduction in famine and want, losing the ability to feed oneself because of global warming just doesn’t make any logical sense on an intellectual level. We know that warmer weather usually makes things grow better. Why would it do the opposite, and why would it do it on a scale of “billions”?!

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  May 8, 2017

      Yep, very little of the climate change alarmism passes even the coarse level of a crap detector test.

  4. I agree, I look at the progress that Indonesia is making in poverty reduction and improvements to basic infrastructure. Sure, a lot remains to be done and one can nit pick about some pockets of poverty in some of the outer islands, but their expectations are limited to daily needs and they have a real sense of community identity in the rural areas, and do help each other out. Comparatively, we are rich here in NZ, but lack a communal ethic and so many people seem unhappy with their lot. They should travel to Asia, Africa and South America and then have a good think about what is life all about anyway.

    As far as the Trump “scorched earth” labelled policy is concerned, it is a label attached to him by the Left Wing Liberal Social factions to denigrate his attempts to empty the trough the Greens and Liberals are busily sucking up. How many of the sceptics have read “Big Agenda” by Davis Horowitz of the New York Times about President Trump’s plan to Save America? Horowitz spells out what, why, how and when the plan will be implemented and it certainly does not contain anything about a “scorched earth” policy. What he does say is that a significant group of US citizens are sick and tired of picking up the tab for the rest of the world only to have been stabbed in the back. There are no free lunches in life, you what you earned and pay for is the motto. At least Trump has a plan and is ticking off the items one by one, but also testing the viability of the plan in a commonsense manner. He is a deal maker and does not play by the Liberal Left’s rules of conduct and that is why they hate him so much.