America cannot be left unhooked – Firstpost
Donald Trump is back in action, and true to form, his second act is getting as interesting as his first. From bold policy gambits to headline-grabbing decisions, Trump is writing the rulebook—again. Whether it’s restructuring trade deals or sparking debates over democracy itself, his decisions are setting the stage for a presidency that means business. In the year 2024 itself, when Trump was campaigning for elections, his public statements in Greenville, North Carolina, about green energy were like:
“… I will terminate the insane electric vehicle mandate. The Green Scam will end… A lot of people like it. I cannot get used to hydrogen. It is great until it blows up. You would not be recognisable…”
He was also seen openly advocating for nuclear energy and conventional forms of energy like crude oil, fossil fuels, etc, in York, Pennsylvania:
“…Rapid approvals for all forms of energy, including nuclear… Green energy is a scam. No clue how Kamala can do it… The EV mandate is absolutely crazy. We don’t have enough electricity for ourselves; how can we put our cars on it? We are sitting on the largest amount of oil and gas; I call it liquid gold…”
Trump 2.0 and withdrawal from the Paris Agreement
Trump has made a unilateral decision. He has prioritised economic recovery over fighting global climate change, reiterating the need for revitalising the nation’s economy vis-à-vis prioritising energy dependency. The United States, the world’s largest producer of oil and gas, will continue to expand production, solidifying its position as a net exporter of fossil fuels.
In his inaugural speech on January 20, President Trump announced that he intends to declare a “national energy emergency”, granting him the authority to suspend America’s existing environmental regulations related to fossil fuels. The declaration aims to accelerate nationwide oil and gas drilling, boost fossil fuel production, and reduce energy costs. This could mean increasing crude oil exports, with an intention to decrease the US’ national debt. Trump has clearly expressed his intention and approach towards domestic and international issues, which have one thing in common, ie, his ‘Make America Great Again’ policy. But at what cost?
Fossil fuel combustion is the largest contributor to global CO2 emissions, accounting for 89 per cent of the total in 2018, and driving a one-degree Celsius rise in global temperatures since pre-industrial times. Methane leaks from natural gas extraction amplify the problem, as methane is 34 times more potent than CO2 at trapping heat. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, UN) warns that emissions must halve within a decade to avoid surpassing the 1.5-degree Celsius warming limit. Fossil fuel use also intensifies extreme weather events like hurricanes and floods, disrupts ecosystems, and threatens food security. Additionally, extraction activities destroy habitats, while burning fuels releases pollutants linked to smog, acid rain, and respiratory diseases.
Donald Trump has doubled down on his staunch support for fossil fuels, dismissing ‘green energy’ as a “scam” and championing the exploitation of America’s vast reserves of ‘liquid gold’—crude oil. Watching Biden rejoin in 2021, Trump wasted no time in reversing course in 2025. Framing clean energy policies as economic liabilities, he has consistently argued that they drive up consumer costs and threaten jobs in traditional energy sectors.
Decoding the Paris Climate Agreement and the Green Climate Fund
The Paris Agreement 2015, ratified by Barack Obama, focuses on capping global temperature rise below two degrees Celsius. Additionally, it emphasises the need for nations to set their greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is the financial mechanism that supports developing nations in tackling climate change, aiming to mobilise $100 billion annually for mitigation and adaptation projects. The US has long been the largest contributor to the GCF, with $3 billion pledged during both the Obama and Biden administrations.
In comparison, other donor nations like Australia, Switzerland, Italy, and Portugal have contributed between $100 million and $300 million each. However, in 2017 Trump halted GCF funding by aligning it with his broader rejection of international climate obligations and the unnecessary drain of American money. He also calls it a ‘raw deal’ for US industries, burdened by strict regulations while major polluters face fewer constraints.
Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and, consequentially, the GCF marks a dramatic shift in US climate policy, creating significant uncertainty for the world’s largest climate fund. Trump’s exit underscores a deeper inconsistency in America’s approach to global climate finance.
Implications for India
On the contrary, emerging great powers such as India are more keen than ever on mitigating climate change, taking the green initiative forward, and adapting to cleaner energy alternatives such as solar, nuclear, hydrogen, thermal, etc. So much so that PM Narendra Modi had shown interest in hosting COP33 in India, where he aspires to become the Voice of the Global South to get a fair share in the carbon budget. The possibilities of India being at the forefront of clean energy and climate change mitigation have heightened. This also aligns with New Delhi’s aspirations of Vishwaguru, at least in this space. However, Trump’s withdrawal has created a significant roadblock in the financial and geopolitical spheres.
Finance
Trump’s withdrawal carries significant consequences, particularly for India, which has been a key beneficiary of GCF funding. To date, India has secured $782.4 million for 11 climate-focused projects targeting critical sectors like water management, renewable energy, and coastal resilience. Ironically, the withdrawal comes as India demonstrates remarkable progress in advancing renewable energy and promoting greener alternatives to fossil fuels.
With reduced US contributions, the availability of funds to support India’s climate initiatives could shrink, posing challenges for its ambitious climate goals. For a nation, leading by example in the global green transition, the possible loss of financial support from the GCF is a step back in the fight against climate change. Among others, there are three extremely pivotal initiatives in the space of climate change mitigation and adaptation that probably will face a roadblock due to the withdrawal. They are as follows:
‘PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana’ (India Solar Rooftop Programme): partially supported by GCF’s $100 million into a $250 million program aimed at developing 250 MW of solar rooftop capacity across India. This initiative is projected to reduce CO2 emissions by 5.2 million tonnes over the next two decades.
India E-Mobility Financing Program: The transit sector is India’s third-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, contributing 13 per cent of total CO2 emissions. The shift to electric vehicles (EVs) presents significant challenges, with users facing financing gaps, energy market complexities, etc. This program is a collaboration between the GCF and Macquarie Asset Management (MAM) to support the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) in India. It will focus on key areas of the EV ecosystem, including shared fleets, e-buses, and charging infrastructure. The has committed $200 million in equity to launch the project, marking a crucial step in India’s transition to sustainable transportation.
Groundwater Recharge and Solar Micro Irrigation: They are assisting in strengthening climate resilience in vulnerable tribal areas of Odisha. It focuses on replenishing groundwater levels to ensure a reliable water source for agriculture, even in droughts. Additionally, the adoption of solar-powered irrigation systems will reduce reliance on traditional energy and enhance sustainable water use.
Geopolitics
The absence of the US in multilateral forums on climate-positive and green/clean energy creates a vacuum for entities like the EU and countries like China and Russia (unless India decides to step up) to fill the leadership vacuum. The entire ‘balance of power’ in global climate governance shifts and weakens, with developing countries often finding themselves at the shorter end of the stick. It also puts these institutions at increased risk of going into silos. It may also lead to a lack of cohesiveness and more room for divergent policy preferences. Consequently, the decision-making abilities of these forums go for a toss. Back home, it will get tougher for New Delhi to navigate the climate policy landscape. Beijing and Moscow’s growing proximity makes it even more complex for New Delhi to balance climate cooperation and negotiate energy deals, keeping in mind various strategic and security concerns.
Way Ahead
What lies in store for the future of the Paris Climate Agreement? There are many possibilities one can foresee. Beginning with the US not in frame, it will give way to other nations who would want to continue relying on conventional forms of energy and stall global progress on climate action. Or, it can also motivate the EU, China, and Russia to take over the green technology market and shape climate policies that are beneficial to them. Furthermore, countries that will prioritise clean energy will lead renewable innovation and investment, while Trump’s withdrawal will lead to American domestic companies invested in renewable energy losing out substantially in this burgeoning sector. The very spirit of Trump’s MAGA (Make America Great Again) will be challenged; a classic catch-22 situation.
What Should India Do?
Given New Delhi and Washington’s bonhomie, the importance of the usage of green energy, and India’s growing strides in the space of climate change and adaptation, both nations have a lot at stake. Probably, PM Modi can offer President Trump quite a few avenues to collaborate and contribute on a bilateral level, if not multilateral. Out of several other shared interests and priorities, domestic manufacturing and economic growth are areas where both democracies have a lot to work together upon. Goals like ‘Atmanirbharta’ and ‘Make in America’ can bring firms in the green-tech arenas under one umbrella: the growth of their respective nations.
Also, PM Modi can convince President Trump to reconsider his stance. If the latter believes the Paris Agreement is unfair, then he can choose to not be a party to it and, at the same time, choose to financially contribute to developing countries that are willing to work on carbon emissions mitigation. After all, one of the largest populations and biggest economies in the globe is majorly responsible for climate change; how can we let it off the hook so easily?
Gargi L Shanbhag is a Research Assistant at Subhas Chandra Bose Chair on International Relations, Chanakya University. Chetan B Singai is the Professor and Dean, of the School of Law, Governance and Public Policy at Chanakya University. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.
Post Comment