The ferocious wildfires that scourged Los Angeles took the lives and homes of numerous neighborhoods, affecting both the poor and the wealthy. Firefighters were forced to watch helplessly as house after house burned when the fire hydrants ran dry. In response, then President-elect Donald Trump took to social media to blast Governor Gavin Newsom and President Joe Biden for allegedly turning off water in the fire hydrants. This led to mass confusion and turned a terrible natural disaster into a heavily politicized blaming game. However, preventing this outcome for Los Angeles required more than just local politics and institutional preparedness. A rational first step would be to understand and accept the science behind the issue, which is a prerequisite for reducing the likelihood of these crises.
This is just one instance of the politicization and mayhem as a result of President Trump’s climate denialism. In January 2025, President Trump announced the United States’ formal withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. In his “Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements” Executive Order, President Trump began the process of withdrawing the United States from any agreement made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). President Trump’s executive order also limits the United States’ financial contribution to aid other countries in regard to climate change.
Furthermore, if President Trump were to completely abandon the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), this would block the United States out of any future climate negotiations. This would also eliminate any influence the United States has in shaping international climate policy and would eliminate any efforts to hold major emitters, such as China, accountable. Since the UNFCCC serves as the basis of global climate cooperation and the international framework that aims to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations, this would create a domino effect in which other nations abandon their climate responsibilities too, derailing any collective progress.
The Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change that was signed in November 2016. This binding agreement was the first treaty to bring together nations to combat climate change. Under this agreement, countries communicate the actions they will take to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to reach the goals of the Paris Agreement. This legally binding accountability ensures countries follow their commitments and holds financial provisions for developing countries. Its main goal is to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and to keep the global temperature rise well below 2°C. However, in recent years, world leaders have emphasized the need to limit global warming to 1.5°C by the end of the century.
President Obama led an urgent and coordinated effort to urge nations to join the Paris Agreement as soon as possible. The U.S. soon became a global leader in climate policy and ushered into an era of global collaboration to tackle climate challenges. This agreement created a booming clean energy industry in the United States and left America with its lowest carbon pollution in two decades and employed more than three million Americans.
However, since then, the narrative in the United States around climate change has been largely reduced to two polarizing sides: climate deniers and climate alarmists. Notably, climate change has been absent from President Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign with topics such as immigration, the economy and democracy taking precedence. In fact, global warming was not brought up until the final question of the September presidential debate.
As the United States steps down as an international leader, some argue that China should step up and lead the fight against climate change. Through its investments in clean energy technology, it can “lead by example.” As the world’s largest emitter, China should introduce a new NDC that is aimed at significantly reducing its pollution levels. This would not only demonstrate its commitment to sustainability but also encourage other nations to adopt more ambitious climate targets. Given the strong link between development and sustainability, such an initiative would position China as a leader in the global climate agenda. China already invests heavily in developing nations, and while it has not explicitly stated whether these investments will align with climate change goals, it has recognized the importance of developing countries supporting one another regarding climate change.
China would likely be interested in this opportunity as it aligns with its long-standing ambition to expand its political and economic influence, particularly in countering U.S. dominance–a goal it has pursued since the 20th century. Such a move would have significant geopolitical ramifications, potentially shifting the balance of power between the two superpowers. As China and the United States remain in close competition, taking the lead in climate change initiatives could provide China with the strategic advantage needed to surpass the U.S. economically and mark the end of American global supremacy, ushering in a new era of influence.
However, this leaves massive implications for the future of the international climate effort to combat climate change. As the United States was the leader in the climate change effort, many are unsure what will come next. It is certain that this marks a return to U.S. isolationism, at the very moment when global cooperation is most needed, and a possible rise in Chinese dominance. If China fills this gap, it would be a double-edged sword. On one hand, increased funding and commitment to climate change could drive real progress. On the other hand, China’s approach to international leadership differs from the U.S., as its investments often come with political strings attached. Thus, climate action could become another avenue for expanding China’s influence, potentially sidelining Western democratic norms in global governance.
