Experts say Trump pullout from UN climate fighting will hurt world and leave US out of green surge

President Trump’s withdrawal from the United Nations climate framework marks a dramatic escalation in America’s environmental isolation, experts warn. The decision goes beyond his previous exit from the 2015 Paris climate accord by removing the U.S. from the foundational United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which has governed international climate cooperation since 1992.

The move represents a complete reversal from three decades of American climate diplomacy that began when President George H.W. Bush championed the framework, which was unanimously ratified by the U.S. Senate. In addition to exiting the UNFCCC, the Trump administration withdrew from the UN climate science panel, biodiversity preservation efforts, and the Green Climate Fund designed to help developing nations address climate challenges.

“It is a more serious step definitely. The world loses a lot and it is very damaging,” said Johan Rockstrom, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. “The U.S. turns its back against science, against global collaboration, against any kind of action on climate change.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the withdrawal, describing these international climate institutions as “redundant in their scope, mismanaged, unnecessary, wasteful, poorly run, captured by the interests of actors advancing their own agendas contrary to our own, or a threat to our nation’s sovereignty, freedoms, and general prosperity.”

The decision comes at a particularly critical moment in climate science. The Earth is approaching the 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) warming threshold established under the Paris Agreement—a level scientists warn could trigger irreversible environmental changes.

“We really have no time and it is so unbelievably stupid at one level and reckless for the Trump administration to be taking the steps that they are taking,” said former Ireland president Mary Robinson, an advocate with the group of retired leaders called The Elders.

The United States bears significant historical responsibility for climate change, having produced nearly a quarter of all global carbon emissions since 1850. Under the Biden administration, the U.S. had pledged to reduce emissions by 61-66% by 2035 as part of global efforts to combat warming.

“It will mean more warming because the U.S. is not going to be fulfilling its obligations of reducing their emissions,” explained Adelle Thomas, climate adaptation director of the Natural Resources Defense Council and vice chair of the UN climate science panel.

Environmental experts note that the U.S. has played a crucial moderating role in past climate negotiations. During international talks, American representatives—particularly when Democrat John Kerry served as Secretary of State or climate envoy—helped prevent oil-producing nations like Saudi Arabia from weakening climate agreements. This influence was noticeably absent during last November’s negotiations in Brazil, which the U.S. skipped under Trump.

Kerry criticized the withdrawal as “a gift to China and a get-out-of-jail free card to countries and polluters who want to avoid responsibility.”

The decision received support from fossil fuel interests. Tom Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, which represents major greenhouse gas-emitting industries, praised the move, saying it would “accelerate a positive shift towards abandoning the destructive global climate framework.”

However, climate advocates argue that the United States is isolating itself from a rapidly evolving global energy economy. UNFCCC Executive Secretary Simon Stiell warned the decision would ultimately harm Americans, resulting in “less affordable energy, food, transport and insurance for American households and businesses, as renewables keep getting cheaper than fossil fuels, as climate-driven disasters hit American crops, businesses and infrastructure harder each year.”

While some environmental advocates fear this withdrawal might be difficult to reverse, Sue Biniaz, a former State Department lawyer and deputy climate negotiator now teaching at Yale, expressed optimism that a future administration could rejoin the framework. “I wouldn’t want to say any sort of damaging action or inaction is irreversible,” Biniaz said. “I imagine a future U.S. government would work with other countries to revive as much as possible. We did that in 2021 after the first Trump administration.”