Dr. Majid Mohammad Sharifi, speaking to the website of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations on the 25th UN Climate Change Summit, attended by representatives of 200 countries in Madrid, also noted the weakening of the summit after the US announced its withdrawal two years ago, the Americans announced they would withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement, and on November 4, 2020, the decision will be enforced. This would leave the United States out of the Paris Agreement, almost one day after the US presidential election and five days before the 26th UN climate summit in Glasgow.

When Trump sought to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, people such as Rex Tillerson and James Mattis, former secretaries of state and defense, insisted that the United States remain in that agreement, but with the removal of the two, who had a more independent vote than Trump, the US decided to withdraw from the deal. Since then, however, the State Department, led by Mike Pompeo, has been working hard to incorporate and enforce the rules that Americans are looking for in the Paris Agreement; that is, they continue to seek influence in the Paris Agreement.

He noted that the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement does not mean an exit from the UN Climate Change Agreement and that the Paris Agreement is part of the UN Climate Change Convention, stating that Americans by remaining in the Paris Convention act as observer.

The international affairs analyst noted that the United States, China, India, and Saudi Arabia are the largest polluters, adding: “Without the United States, even a treaty cannot be enforced.” How can a treaty be enforced when a country that owns one-third of its pollutants is out of the pollution abatement agreement? Therefore, other countries are trying to persuade the country to maintain its obligations under the treaty despite the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. In fact, the Europeans are trying to form a united front against the US and the countries that oppose the agreements.

He said that it does not appear that the Americans could depart from these treaties in order to completely destroy these agreements and pursue a new order based on bilateral agreements, adding: “At the Paris meeting we also saw Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, taking part which means that the US presence in international meetings and agreements should continue to be preserved because it is part of the US responsibility to play a leading role in the world and should not be excluded, so the US should not withdraw from them at all as US withdrawal from this type of international accords has many opponents. There are some people even in the Trump administration who oppose this approach.”

Emphasizing that this policy appears to be only specific to Trump’s own discourse, he said: Exit from multilateral agreements only makes sense in a part of the populist and nationalist Trump discourse, and if another Democratic government comes to power, they will probably restore the agreements Trump has pulled out from.

“US withdrawal from these agreements will question the effectiveness of the annual meetings,” he said, adding: “If the US government wants to reduce its commitments in this agreement and other international commitments, some other governments may follow suit. As a matter of fact, in the current situation, a number of countries are following this policy. Even in NATO something similar has happened that has led to sharp criticism from the French president which means that if the US is reducing its commitments, on the other hand, Turkey is reducing its commitments as well and other member states are pursuing this policy in other ways.

If the US pullout from international institutions and agreements continues, it could weaken these deals. “If Trump’s withdrawal from these accords had a tangible achievement for Americans and if this could change America’s relative advantage compared to certain countries, such as China and Russia, the policy is likely to find supporters among other countries and even the Democrats prompting them to continue this trend.”

He said Trump has shown that he and his close circle do not look at the strategic aspects of the decisions they make and the strategic implications of such decisions regarding the idea of ​​American global governance and leadership. The Trump administration does not pay much attention to abstract issues and seeks tangible and objective results in the agreements.

Sharifi noted that no representatives from the Trump administration were present at the UN climate change summit, adding that if the process of American withdrawal from international commitments continues, it will have far-reaching consequences in all areas, but the question is whether this process will continue. Now, as the Trump era is on, we have to wait for the right answer to this question because the process may change with the arrival of the Democrats as they are more sensitive to these issues and question the reputation of the United States as a global leader.

Noting that America’s’ withdrawal from critical and important agreements for the international system, including a short-range ballistic missile and nuclear treaties, he said: “These measures could seriously undermine their performance.”

Sharifi explained: Trump believes that by withdrawing from these agreements, it is possible to increase the relative advantage of Americans.