There can be no negotiating with US president Donald Trump’s administration when it comes to climate change. Their approach threatens the safe future of humanity on this planet, so there can be no meeting halfway or any transactional exchange.
Their agenda is to sow doubt, division and delay around our climate response. That’s not something we can arbitrate, mediate or compromise away.
It’s time for the rest of the world to stick to our climate agreements and support the multilateral institutions which will help us deliver them. We want a peaceful and prosperous future for all our children, in a stable and diverse natural world. That mission is hard enough without having to take two steps back whenever one government denies the science and shirks their responsibility.
The assault on the international climate order has been planned in detail, which is why this administration is so much more dangerous than Trump’s previous one. One of his first executive orders was to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate. The US is the only government to do this.
There’s a telegraph pole in my garden and I don’t know what it’s for, or who owns it. How can I find out?
Heather Humphreys profile: Popular Fine Gael matriarch is no stranger to controversy but has broad appeal
Barbie Ferreira: ‘Even when I don’t feel confident I feign it, to control the space I’m in’
Chloe Malle to succeed Anna Wintour as head of US Vogue
Leaving will weaken Trump’s hand. As an observer, you don’t get to be centre stage and you have no right to be calling the shots. The folly of this decision will be all the more obvious if the rest of the world gets on with the business of promoting trade and investment in the greener alternative.
The truth is that Trump’s agenda of “drill, baby, drill” holds the weaker cards. Legislation passed by US Congress this summer aims to kill its own renewable industry and promote fossil fuels instead.
Christiana Figueres, one of the architects of the Paris Agreement, described the new US legislation as a crime against humanity. It will cost the American people the most, not just because of extreme weather, but also because they will miss out on the benefits of advancing clean energy, sustainable transport, forestry and farming.
The majority of governments will understand that the economic advantage lies with those who first adopt this better-technology future. History will harshly judge any administration siding with the retrograde Trump policies. Such policies can only lead to widespread destruction and ruin. They are an act of turning your back on your own people and failing to recognise what is happening in the real world.
The first shot in this battle to protect the international climate order was fired this summer. Stories from Washington reported that Trump wanted to get rid of Mary Warlick, second in command of the International Energy Agency (IEA). In my experience as former co-chair of the agency’s governing board, she is an official of the highest integrity who has delivered great public service through her work.
The issue is coming to a head because the US government is about to publish a review which is likely to call for its withdrawal of support for various UN and other multilateral institutions. The IEA is one of the smallest agencies threatened but because it works at the heart of the global climate response, it is likely to be in the firing line.
The US hand is weak because it is taking on one of the most highly respected international agencies, widely trusted for accurate, timely and independent energy information. Like many experts, it underestimated the speed and scale of the renewable revolution that is taking hold but it is constantly updating and improving its analysis and data systems. It plays a vital role in the OECD, EU, G7, G20 and within international climate negotiations.
Its core responsibility is to provide energy security for some of the richest countries in the world, but the organisation has also stood resolutely for climate justice and for energy access for all. It is not afraid of speaking truth to power, but always in the most diplomatic, articulate and reasoned way. Its leadership is first rate and should not be forced to change.
Should there be any undue US demands to do just that, then I expect a meeting of ministers would be called, where a response would have to be decided upon. In such circumstances, I hope they adopt the advice that Professor Sheila Heen, head of the Harvard Negotiation Project, gave to US law firms when they were similarly under attack from Trump.
That advice was simply: “Do not negotiate.” Stand up to the bully. There can be no meeting of minds here.
Should the US Government threaten to cut its funding, then I believe alternative sources would be in place within weeks. Should it seek to litigate, I’m equally confident they would lose out in any international court.
Trump’s approach has to be confronted, defeated and not placated. For those who question why Europe and other countries would take a stand on climate, when they have failed to do so on other issues, it is because this is a common cause.
We showed in the signing of the Paris Agreement that we can come together, even in a divided world. Deep down, we know this is an evolutionary leap we all need to make together. It’s time to take a united stand in support of international climate co-operation - which can start by resolutely defending the IEA.
