The short-term climate goals of the US must be monitored and the country should be made accountable for its huge emissions
The US-centric climate diplomacy reminds one of the world order, after the collapse of the USSR, following which America dictated the terms of international politics. However, the current situation of a unipolar world is contested with the rise of Asian superpowers.
The climate scientists were horrified when former US President Donald Trump announced withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. Now, with the change in leadership, the US has taken over global climate politics again. The major reason is not just the power that the US commands, but also because it is the second-largest emitter globally. The cancellation of the UNFCCC climate summit in 2020 due to the pandemic delayed many climate goals. So the US bid to bring climate front and centre was a welcome step. But, making the world move around its major polluter is not a favourable solution. The recently-elected Democrats have sanctioned a huge amount to reduce domestic emission. Though one believes that the Republicans didn’t do much for world climate, there are doubts about what the Democrats did when they were in power, and was it sufficient? The global climate goals were relaxed, and many scientists say that the Paris Agreement was a loosely-binding document.
Before the recently-concluded Leaders Summit on Climate, John Kerry, US special presidential envoy for climate visited many countries to gain their support. In world politics as big States make strong commitments, others often follow to prove themselves. US President Joe Biden made numerous commitments and put climate change at the centre of its policies. He also promised to double the funding that was to be given to developing countries by 2024, in comparison to what the US had spent in the second half of the Obama Administration. NATO officials committed to reducing emissions from military units and the CIA has also added environment to its World Factbook.
A more aggressive plan was expected to be rolled out. Environmental groups and businesses urged Biden to set an emission reduction target of at least 50 per cent by 2030. Many scientists have accepted that it is scientifically feasible, that the US should cut emissions at least up to 65 per cent below the 2005 levels in this decade. Especially, as other developed nations like the UK have pledged to reduce emissions by 68 per cent by 2030. Democrats like congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have proposed the ‘Green New Deal’, which would eliminate carbon emissions from most sources over a decade. There were high expectations from the US and unless highly-ambitious short-term pledges aren’t achieved, it is difficult to believe that the long-term obligations will bear results. The commitments from the US will push other economies to follow suit. It is better if the US sets an example for other States to follow. The setting of targets is a positive first step, but making adequate policy changes and rolling out money are practical indicators of change.
On the second day of the summit, the White House mentioned that it lags behind China in developing clean technologies. The US formally pledged to cut its emissions by 50 per cent-52 per cent by 2030. It also announced its determination to reach a net-zero level by 2050. It is a new Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement.
China reiterated that it would be carbon-neutral by 2060 and India reiterated its promise to install 450 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2030 and also announced the ‘India-US Climate and Clean Energy Agenda 2030 Partnership’. Japan also pledged a new cut in emissions by 46 per cent, below the 2013 levels by the end of the decade. Israel upped its target by ending the use of coal domestically by 2025. A welcome step was taken by Brazil, as it pledged to eliminate illegal deforestation by 2030 and achieve carbon-neutral status by 2050 (a decade earlier than the previous target).
The moves by States like Brazil were viewed sceptically as earlier its President Jair Bolsonaro had threatened to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. He had also asked the Biden administration for $1 billion for the conservation of the Amazon rainforest. Obviously, the shift towards a clean energy economy was propagated to attract other countries to pledge more.
Biden said, “The countries that take decisive actions now to tackle climate change will be the ones that reap the clean energy benefits of the boom that’s coming.” However, the credibility of the US is at stake, given that its domestic politics makes major changes in international climate roles. Kerry was asked by many States, “You destroyed your credibility when you left the Paris Agreement, how can we trust you?” The US President responded to it by putting the future in the hands of the private sector, as it will turn clean energy policies into reality.
The need of the hour is to make the ones most responsible for the global loss the centre of shame rather than the centre of power. Fulfilling long-terms obligations is very important, but it is comparatively easier as the global and domestic politics will change by then. The short-term goals of the US must be monitored and it should be made accountable for its huge emissions.
The writer is a PhD Researcher, JNU. The views expressed are personal.
