President Donald Trump withdraws the United States from the UNFCCC—the foundational 1992 climate treaty—and the IPCC, alongside 66 other international organizations deemed “contrary to US interests.” This sweeping White House move severs ties with the backbone of global climate agreements like Kyoto and Paris, halting official US participation in annual UN summits.
Consequently, America becomes the first nation to exit the nearly universal UNFCCC, raising alarms over future climate cooperation and rejoining Paris commitments.
Details of the Historic Climate Treaty Exit
The UNFCCC, ratified by Congress under George H.W. Bush, sets non-binding goals to stabilize greenhouse gases and spawned landmark pacts including the 1995 Kyoto Protocol and 2015 Paris Agreement. Wednesday’s memorandum targets 31 UN entities like UN Water and UN Women, plus non-UN groups such as the Global Counterterrorism Forum. Secretary of State Marco Rubio justifies the cuts, stating the US will avoid “expending resources… in institutions irrelevant to or in conflict with our interests.”
Trump skipped this year’s national climate inventory submission, signaling prior disengagement. Legal questions swirl since Senate ratification may require Congressional approval for reversal, though Republican majorities likely support it.
Implications for Global Climate Action
This exit blocks US involvement in future climate summits and complicates federal scientist contributions to IPCC reports—the Nobel-winning body assessing global warming. Critics like John Kerry label it “a gift to China,” freeing polluters from accountability while undermining US leadership. Future presidents face hurdles rejoining Paris, nested under UNFCCC auspices.
Moreover, the move follows Trump’s Day One Paris withdrawal redux and prior WHO exit, part of broader UN skepticism rooted in a February executive order reviewing international support.
Reactions and Potential Fallout
Environmental groups like NRDC decry America as the first UNFCCC defector, risking cascade effects as allies reassess commitments. Rubio emphasizes selective cooperation serving Americans, but opponents warn of isolated US climate policy amid escalating global crises. The withdrawal could reshape negotiations, amplifying LMIC voices while sidelining Washington’s influence.
Transitioning to broader cuts, the 66 organizations span gender equality, population, oceans—reflecting priorities favoring national sovereignty over multilateralism.
Questions Surrounding the UN Exits
Can Trump unilaterally reverse a Senate-ratified treaty?
How does this impact US scientists’ IPCC role?
Will allies follow suit or strengthen UNFCCC resolve?
Q&A: Key Facts on US Climate Withdrawals
Q: What treaty heads the exit list?
A: UNFCCC (1992), parent to Kyoto and Paris, ratified by US Senate.
Q: Which other climate body leaves?
A: IPCC, producer of authoritative global warming assessments.
Q: Total organizations cut?
A: 66, including 31 UN entities like UN Water, UN Oceans, Population Fund.
Q: Who defends the move?
A: Sec. State Marco Rubio cites resource waste in irrelevant institutions.
Q: Prior Trump climate action?
A: Second Paris withdrawal on inauguration; skipped 2025 pollution inventory.
FAQ: UNFCCC and IPCC Withdrawal Explained
Does UNFCCC mandate emission cuts?
No—sets stabilization goals, negotiation framework; non-binding targets.
Why first country to exit UNFCCC?
Virtually universal membership; Trump’s “America First” rejects multilateral climate frameworks.
IPCC impact on US researchers?
Federal participation ends, though individuals may contribute unofficially.
Legal path to rejoin Paris?
Withdrawal complicates, as Paris operates under UNFCCC umbrella.
Broader UN cuts context?
Follows WHO exit, executive order reviewing support for US interests.
