The United States’ decision to send such low-level representatives to the upcoming UN climate talks in Brazil should be seen in this light. While officials from the Trump administration have denied this move, this enforcement decision marks an enormous departure from the past three decades. Even at the height of those defections, the US was a farcical outlier, actively participating in such summits even as the administrations of George W. Bush and Donald Trump were uninterested in addressing global heating.
The lack of top-level US officials at the UN climate conference, COP30, only compounds the challenges facing the summit. This event is already dealing with multiple crises. The Trump administration has certainly signaled their disinterest in efforts to engage at that higher level. In an unprecedented move, they have shuttered the office in the U.S. State Department — which typically handles all climate-related matters — for example.
Over the years, the Paris climate agreement has stood as a critical framework for countries to limit dangerous global temperature rises. To be clear, President Trump has previously referred to the climate crisis as a “hoax” and a “con job.” He is calling on the US to pull out of the deal. His position has extended even to calling on other countries to stop pursuing renewable energy projects and instead focus on fossil fuel investments.
Even with no participation from the federal government, an exciting mix of subnational American jurisdictions will be in attendance at COP30. Governors, members of Congress, mayors, and climate activists will attend, signaling that local leaders are pushing forward with their climate action plans. This hyperlocal grassroots approach stands in stark contrast to current federal policy and is a testament to action and commitment to climate change at all levels.
Former senior State Department officials have raised doubts about the usefulness of US participation under the current administration. One official stated, “If the choice is no US or a US that is there as a spoiler, to wreck and disrupt things, then I think most countries would prefer there to be no US.”
A former Senator, Sheldon Whitehouse, noted that there is little indication of any last-minute changes from the administration regarding attendance. He remarked, “So at this point, I don’t think there’s any sign of [the administration attending], but who knows? This is a very mercurial administration.”
The Trump administration’s emphasis on fossil fuels over renewables has been widely condemned by climate advocates. Taylor Rogers, a spokesperson for the administration, defended their energy agenda by stating, “The Green New Scam would have killed America if President Trump had not been elected to implement his commonsense energy agenda – which is focused on utilizing the liquid gold under our feet to strengthen our grid stability and drive down costs for American families and businesses.”
Moreover, Todd Stern, another former State Department official, commented on the current administration’s stance, saying, “I don’t think they would add anything useful. This is a much more aggressive administration now, across the board. I think the great majority of countries aren’t going to pay attention to that. They know climate change is real.”
The implications of not sending high-level representatives could result in diminished influence for the US in international discussions surrounding climate change. As countries globally grapple with increasing climate crises, many may view the absence of US leadership as a setback in collaborative efforts to combat global warming.