In a surprising move, President Donald Trump has withdrawn the United States from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. This decision comes as no surprise, illustrating once again the unorthodox approach of his administration to international relations. This decision fits into a bigger strategy. He pulled the U.S. out of 65 other bodies, high commissions, collectives, organizations—whatever you want to call them. Citing these actions as “contrary to the interests” of the United States, Trump’s presidential memorandum highlights a shift towards unilateralism in foreign policy.
This withdrawal comes against the backdrop of Trump’s rediscovered obsession with re-establishing U.S. dominance over the Western Hemisphere, most especially in Venezuela. He claimed that the U.S. was receiving full cooperation from the Venezuelan regime. He’s hoping that will help the U.S. lock in control over the country’s enormous oil reserves for decades to come. This strategy involves much more than simply amassing resources. It symbolizes a broader political move that is on a foreign policy basis increasingly isolating the U.S. from international norms and institutions.
Trump’s actions have polarized and politicized the discussion. Jan-Werner Müller calls the current administration’s ruling style a “mafia state.” He argues that Trump’s aggressive, populist, and nationalist foreign policy poses a radical departure from the emphasis on liberal cooperative governance over power. The President clearly and aggressively pursues the unitary executive theory. This unitary executive theory has traditionally been advanced in favor of increasing presidential power on domestic and foreign policy issues.
The Shift in International Relations
Especially significant is the withdrawal from climate related agreements — a turning point for U.S. role in international institutions. Under Trump’s leadership, that participation is no longer a foregone conclusion. This trend towards unilateralism and fragmentation harms efforts to address global collective action challenges, such as the climate crisis. To them, it seems to represent a broader envelope of isolationism in American politics.
Peter Trubowitz, a political analyst, noted, “Trump’s not even bothering to justify them legally.” This observation highlights a dangerous trend of contempt for international law and rules-based diplomatic order. Trubowitz explained what drives Trump to act this way, saying, “For him, this is about power. This complex, power-centric approach is important and has deep implications. Beyond that, it is a troubling sign of the current administration’s shift away from collaboration and towards an isolationist unilateral U.S. foreign policy.
Further complicating the geopolitical situation is Trump’s laser focus on Venezuela. He promises to bring U.S. oil reserves under American control. Trubowitz emphasized, “He knows America has the power and the leverage to get Venezuela’s resources, full stop.” This claim falls in line with Trump’s grander scheme of re-asserting U.S. hegemony in its own neighborhood while waging war on multilateralism.
Domestic Polarization and Political Dynamics
We are acutely aware that the current political climate in the United States is extremely polarized. This chasm has given Trump to further entrench party loyalty within his base. This culture quells any internal criticism. More importantly, it allows Trump to enact his agenda with less opposition within the Republican Party.
Significantly, even Republicans of Trump’s ilk have at times expressed their opposition to Trump’s direction. Almost immediately, they dropped back into step behind his administration. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s short-lived opposition is a case in point. It illustrates that party loyalty often trumps personal convictions in our toxic, polarized political climate.
Indeed, many of Trump’s choices have drawn blistering rebukes for being “vindictive” and “cruel.” This created backlash, which escalated after his recent administrative actions that eliminated more than $10 billion in funding for childcare and family support services. These actions have made clear the ethical implications of his autocratic style of governance and absence of governing that leaves vulnerable populations at risk.
The Global Response to Trump’s Policies
Though the world has seen these damaging consequences play out, European leaders have been reluctant to openly criticize Trump’s policies on Venezuela. They worry that by openly opposing or challenging the U.S., they could ruin the favor of an American backer of Ukraine’s in the current war against Russia. This fear—and the response to it—reveals profound concerns about the direction of U.S. foreign policy. It’s becoming more and more like the logic of domestic politics under the influence of Trump’s guidance.
For the global community this presents a new challenge when dealing with the United States. Its approach to international relations is very much impacted by the lens of domestic polarization and party loyalty. Now he’s turning his sights on Latin America. The most profound impact of his policies might be to recast global alliances and alter the way the world views American leadership.