The Paris Agreement lives on
So Donald Trump has finally done what he threatened to do - he has pulled the US out of the Paris Climate Agreement. We can probably all agree that this is irresponsible, short-sighted and typical behaviour of the ignorant bully we know him to be. But will it play out as badly as we fear? I suspect not - or at least not in the way we assume. I think the global fight will be strengthened and America's position will revert to the "right" side of this issue before too long.
But I do have concerns about the UK arising from this.
One of the striking things to come out of this is an immense upswell in unity by much of the rest of the world. Much as Trump himself may have missed this crucial fact, the United States is not the whole world. What others think, matters. We know that 197 countries signed the agreement and that 147 have so far ratified it. In fact, only two countries held aloof from it: Nicaragua because they felt it was not ambitious enough, and Syria, who one might excuse for being preoccupied in recent years. From the other players, some impressive responses have emerged: an alliance affirmed between China and the EU. And within the EU a clear and firm joint statement of redoubled commitment by France, Germany and Italy. A bold speech by Emmanuel Macron in which he unequivocally states that the agreement remains irreversible and concludes by trolling Trump directly with the slogan "Make our planet great again".
Equally cheering are reactions within the US itself. There's a rumour going around that representatives of US cities, States and Companies are intending to submit a plan directly to the UN of how they will still honour the commitments of the US, despite Trump's stance. We have already seen public commitments to continue the fight against Climate Change, from New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Salt Lake City, Pittsburgh and Atlanta among others. Particularly outraged is Pittsburgh which The President bizarrely referenced in his justification: "I was elected by the voters of Pittsburgh not Paris". Bizarre on so many levels, but let's take just two. The fact that it is called the Paris Agreement is no reference to the citizens of Paris - it just happens to be where the leaders were at the time they signed. And the voters of Pittsburgh rejected Trump rather resoundingly - 80% of their votes went to Hilary. The majority of people in every single state in America supports the Paris Agreement, so exactly which voters does he pretend to serve?
The business community of the US seems equally disapproving. Robert Iger, CEO of Disney, has resigned from Trump's Strategic and Policy Forum and Hewlett-Packard and Mars have publically condemned the move. Even Jeoff Immelt, Chair and CEO of General Electric has said that "climate change is real" and that in the light of governmental abdication of responsibility, "industry must now lead".
So, I remain upbeat. As I have with all of Trump's insanities so far. Every time he proposes or enacts something foolish or dangerous, the US people and systems haul him back in, or simply bypass him as irrelevant. The US will continue to move towards cleaner energy because that's where the future lies. And if they lag behind for a bit, well his tenure will be over eventually. A new administration will lead the catching-up.
What concerns me far more, are the implications for the UK. What is our own administration playing at? Both Boris Johnson and Theresa May have been cosying up to Trump since last year and it looks downright odd by any standards. Who can forget the nauseating hand-holding? Albeit with less of a fanfare, this country's trajectory seems worryingly similar to Trump's. One of Mrs May's very first acts on taking office was to disband the Department for Climate Change. And she has studiously resisted joining the statements of unity emanating from Europe this week to condemn Mr Trump's decision.
Emily Thornberry has issued an angry statement pointing out how many times since November she has raised concerns in The House about Trump's Climate Change stance. And how many times she was patronisingly brushed aside by Johnson. Even in March apparently, he mocked the "mutterings of the Right Honourable Lady" and said we should wait to "see what the American Administration actually do. I think she [Thornberry] will be pleasantly surprised". Does that mean our government was unpleasantly surprised this week? As Thornberry says, it's not good however you look at it. Are Johnson, May et al really not that bothered about Climate Change? Maybe they haven't attempted to put pressure on Trump and this is why they have been lacklustre in their response this week. Or maybe they tried with all their might, but were ignored anyway, despite our "special relationship".
If it's the former, then all the more reason why they should be voted out next week. The future does not lie in clinging to the past in colossal acts of self-damaging denial.
If it's the latter, does this inability to influence our closest friend (by Tory reckoning at least) have any bearing on their likely ability to influence the 27 leaders of the EU in the next 18 months?
But I do have concerns about the UK arising from this.
One of the striking things to come out of this is an immense upswell in unity by much of the rest of the world. Much as Trump himself may have missed this crucial fact, the United States is not the whole world. What others think, matters. We know that 197 countries signed the agreement and that 147 have so far ratified it. In fact, only two countries held aloof from it: Nicaragua because they felt it was not ambitious enough, and Syria, who one might excuse for being preoccupied in recent years. From the other players, some impressive responses have emerged: an alliance affirmed between China and the EU. And within the EU a clear and firm joint statement of redoubled commitment by France, Germany and Italy. A bold speech by Emmanuel Macron in which he unequivocally states that the agreement remains irreversible and concludes by trolling Trump directly with the slogan "Make our planet great again".
Equally cheering are reactions within the US itself. There's a rumour going around that representatives of US cities, States and Companies are intending to submit a plan directly to the UN of how they will still honour the commitments of the US, despite Trump's stance. We have already seen public commitments to continue the fight against Climate Change, from New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Salt Lake City, Pittsburgh and Atlanta among others. Particularly outraged is Pittsburgh which The President bizarrely referenced in his justification: "I was elected by the voters of Pittsburgh not Paris". Bizarre on so many levels, but let's take just two. The fact that it is called the Paris Agreement is no reference to the citizens of Paris - it just happens to be where the leaders were at the time they signed. And the voters of Pittsburgh rejected Trump rather resoundingly - 80% of their votes went to Hilary. The majority of people in every single state in America supports the Paris Agreement, so exactly which voters does he pretend to serve?
The business community of the US seems equally disapproving. Robert Iger, CEO of Disney, has resigned from Trump's Strategic and Policy Forum and Hewlett-Packard and Mars have publically condemned the move. Even Jeoff Immelt, Chair and CEO of General Electric has said that "climate change is real" and that in the light of governmental abdication of responsibility, "industry must now lead".
So, I remain upbeat. As I have with all of Trump's insanities so far. Every time he proposes or enacts something foolish or dangerous, the US people and systems haul him back in, or simply bypass him as irrelevant. The US will continue to move towards cleaner energy because that's where the future lies. And if they lag behind for a bit, well his tenure will be over eventually. A new administration will lead the catching-up.
What concerns me far more, are the implications for the UK. What is our own administration playing at? Both Boris Johnson and Theresa May have been cosying up to Trump since last year and it looks downright odd by any standards. Who can forget the nauseating hand-holding? Albeit with less of a fanfare, this country's trajectory seems worryingly similar to Trump's. One of Mrs May's very first acts on taking office was to disband the Department for Climate Change. And she has studiously resisted joining the statements of unity emanating from Europe this week to condemn Mr Trump's decision.
Emily Thornberry has issued an angry statement pointing out how many times since November she has raised concerns in The House about Trump's Climate Change stance. And how many times she was patronisingly brushed aside by Johnson. Even in March apparently, he mocked the "mutterings of the Right Honourable Lady" and said we should wait to "see what the American Administration actually do. I think she [Thornberry] will be pleasantly surprised". Does that mean our government was unpleasantly surprised this week? As Thornberry says, it's not good however you look at it. Are Johnson, May et al really not that bothered about Climate Change? Maybe they haven't attempted to put pressure on Trump and this is why they have been lacklustre in their response this week. Or maybe they tried with all their might, but were ignored anyway, despite our "special relationship".
If it's the former, then all the more reason why they should be voted out next week. The future does not lie in clinging to the past in colossal acts of self-damaging denial.
If it's the latter, does this inability to influence our closest friend (by Tory reckoning at least) have any bearing on their likely ability to influence the 27 leaders of the EU in the next 18 months?
Comments
Post a Comment