- Global climate action will continue without the US — While the withdrawal weakens funding and diplomacy, Europe, Asia and emerging economies are strengthening alliances on renewables, carbon markets and fossil fuel phase-outs.
- The clean energy shift is now economically irreversible — Falling renewable costs, job creation and investment returns mean market forces – not politics – are driving decarbonization worldwide.
- US states and cities are defying federal disengagement — From California to New York, local governments, businesses and universities remain committed to Paris targets, ensuring America stays partially engaged in the climate fight.
The decision by the Trump administration to withdraw the United States from dozens of international organizations and treaties focused on environmental protection and climate action has triggered widespread concern among scientists, environmental groups, and international partners. However, experts say the move is unlikely to halt global climate efforts or the worldwide shift toward clean energy.
According to US nonprofit advocacy group the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), the administration plans to pull out of 66 international organizations, including key environmental bodies such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), DW.COM reports.
The decision is part of a broader push to reduce US participation in multilateral institutions deemed not to serve American interests.
The withdrawal includes stepping back from the UNFCCC, which oversees the annual UN climate conferences and underpins global climate negotiations. The move follows President Donald Trump’s renewed criticism of climate science and his long-standing support for the fossil fuel industry. Shortly after beginning his second term, Trump reiterated his intention to exit the Paris Agreement, which aims to limit global warming.
Rachel Cleetus, policy director at the UCS Climate and Energy Program, described the decision as “yet another sign that this anti-science administration is willing to sacrifice public well-being and undermine global cooperation.” She warned that US disengagement weakens collective efforts to confront a crisis that increasingly affects lives and economies.
European leaders responded with disappointment but reaffirmed their commitment to climate action. European Union climate chief Wopke Hoekstra said the UNFCCC remains the foundation of global climate cooperation and called the US decision “regrettable and unfortunate.” He stressed that Europe would continue to support climate research and international collaboration.
Germany’s Environment Minister Carsten Schneider said the move did not come as a surprise, noting that the US had become increasingly isolated on climate issues. He pointed to new international alliances on carbon markets, fossil fuel phase-outs, and efforts to counter climate misinformation as evidence that the rest of the world remains committed.
Environmental groups say the absence of the US could make negotiations more difficult and reduce available funding. Petter Lyden, co-head of international climate policy at Germanwatch, said losing US participation weakens both financing and political momentum. However, he added that the global transition to low-carbon energy is already well underway and driven by strong economic incentives.
“The expansion of renewable energy will continue,” Lyden said, noting that countries investing in clean technologies are reaping economic and employment benefits. He argued that the direction of travel toward decarbonization is now largely irreversible.
Within the United States, the move has drawn sharp criticism from climate leaders and state-level actors. Gina McCarthy, former White House climate adviser and now chair of the climate coalition America Is All In, called the withdrawal “shortsighted, embarrassing, and foolish,” warning it would cost the US influence over trillions of dollars in climate-related investments.
McCarthy said that despite federal disengagement, US states, cities, businesses, and universities remain committed to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement. She stressed that local and regional initiatives will continue to drive clean energy deployment, public health benefits, and economic growth.
While analysts acknowledge that state-level action cannot fully replace federal leadership, many believe that local governments and the private sector will play an increasingly important role. California and other climate-forward states are expected to continue aggressive emissions reduction and renewable energy programs.
Rachel Cleetus also emphasized that the rest of the world recognizes the growing risks of climate change, from extreme heat and floods to wildfires and storms. She said collective global action remains the only viable path to securing a livable future for future generations.
Despite the US administration’s retreat, global renewable energy adoption is accelerating, and international climate cooperation is deepening among other major economies. Experts say the climate agenda has moved beyond any single country and is now driven by market forces, public demand, and the rising costs of inaction.
While Washington’s withdrawal creates political and financial challenges, the broader clean energy transition appears set to continue, reshaping economies and energy systems worldwide.
