Memo on the United States Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords

TO: United States Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt

FROM:  Aran Hamilton-Grenham

SUBJECT:  Paris Climate Agreement

DATE:  April 29th, 2018

SUMMARY:  In December of 2015, the world agreed to the Paris Climate Accords with the exception of two countries, Nicaragua and Syria.  The agreement was not binding, and instead had every country willingly enter a certain amount of carbon emissions that they as a country would reduce.  President Trump has long held the agreement in contempt, claiming that it disadvantaged American companies and interests.  In 2017, President Trump made the decision to withdraw the United States from the agreement, where 2020 will be the year that the United States has entirely withdrawn as scheduled now.  As of 2013, the United States contributed more to greenhouse gasses than any other country in the world.  Our withdrawal not only threatens the well being of the environment and its habitability for humans, but it also denigrates the United States image in the world.  The United States should rejoin the agreement and recommit to the long term well-being of the world.

CONTEXT:  Combatting global climate change was long a priority of the Obama administration, as the world has increasingly become hotter.  According to NASA, the rise in world temperature and increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide are unequivocally due to human activity. In fact, since 17 of the hottest 18 years on record have come in the 21st Century, beginning in 1880 when temperature began being collected.  In 2015, the United Nations Climate Change Conference took place from November 30th to December 12th.  The agreement is entirely voluntary, with each country pledging what they decide.  The United States, as part of their initial agreement agreed to reduce carbon emissions by 28% by 2025, and also pledged three billion dollars to assist developing countries who would be reducing their economic development in favor of a healthy environment.  This was partially in response to Nicaragua not joining the agreement because it was not binding and did not insist on developed countries paying a larger price.  President Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement, citing issues such as a potential loss of 2.7 million jobs, he claimed that the difference the agreement was making was minimal at best, and even said that the United States could potentially suffer from blackouts due to not having enough energy.  The economic arguments have been widely disputed because the statistics overlook the economic impact of increased investment in clean technology.  The withdrawal is set to be fully take place as of 2020, so the United States still has time to reconsider the decision.

ALTERNATIVE:  The alternative that is being proposed here is that the United States rejoin the agreement and remain a leader in the international task of limiting global climate change.  If the United States does not, is is abdicating its role as a global leader and allowing China to fill that void.  There are certain issues that one country alone can not handle the task of taking on.  With global climate change, if one or two major countries are not party to the agreement, then the whole idea of it it loses legitimacy.  For climate change to be taken on, there is no effective alternative other than international cooperation.

MAIN ARGUMENT:  Global climate change is an issue that can not be addressed by one country.  Some have made the argument that the country can take on the issue better alone, complying with its own standards and doing it in a way that is most effective for itself.  The ironic part of this argument is that it is essentially what the United States does in the agreement.  The Paris Agreement allows for each country to set and determine its own policies and goals.  There is not watchdog or mandate that another country may set.  Therefore, there is no advantage in taking on global climate change outside the agreement as opposed to within it.  Beyond just this though, there are various harms that leaving the agreement cause.  With the United States leaving, it runs the risk of undermining the agreement.  Now, the facts have indicated differently, with Nicaragua and Syria joining the agreement making the United States the only country that is not party to the agreement.  So the detrimental impact of leaving is on the United States image.  The international community coming together and agreeing to a certain policy is rare to say the least, and by leaving the United States undermines that consistency.  Beyond just this, the issue is larger.  Global climate change is an issue that requires the buy in of the entire world.  One country can’t fix it.  So, the United States by leaving, and having the highest level of emissions in the world, is undermining the effectiveness of the agreement all by ourselves.  The eyes and ire of the world is directed towards us.  The physical harm that risks harming the United States is significant. By the end of the century, New Hampshire could be as warm as North Carolina.  On top of this, the sea level rising threatens major coastal cities such as Miami, which could lead to humanitarian disasters.  

CONCLUSION:  By leaving the Paris agreement, the United States has threatened the well being of not just the environment as we understand it, but the security of the country.  We also have made ourselves look bad to the international community, allowing China to fill in and assume even more power.  By addressing climate change now, the world has made steps to prevent what could be a financial burden in the future.  While it may result in short term economic losses, in the long run it will pay off for the people of the United States.  

Memorandum on US Involvement in the Paris Agreement

Memorandum on US Involvement in the Paris Agreement

To:                  Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America

From:              William D. Troast, Foreign Policy Advisor

Date:              26 April 2018

Subject:         Should the US Re-enter the Paris Agreement?

Intro

It is an undeniable fact that the world’s climate is changing. Since the beginning of the 21^st century, the mark for the hottest world temperature has been set in four different years, most recently in 2015, which is what lead to the creation of the Paris Agreement. Although climate change is a problem which affects all nations equally, the United States does not need to be an official member of the agreement to make a change. It is in the United States best interests to act independently.

Context

In recent years, the effects of climate change have become much more obvious. The hottest world temperature has been reset in four different years, the temperature of the oceans has risen by .8 degrees Celsius, and if the world temperature reaches 2 degrees Celsius the world will face dire consequences. In 2015, all the nations of the world, except for Nicaragua and Syria, signed the Paris Agreement. This agreement was designed to create a global initiative to reduce greenhouse emissions, and ultimately preventing the world from reaching an average temperature of 2 degrees Celsius. The agreement does have its pitfalls, though. The first being that no section of this agreement is binding. Although every nation is required to set goals and check back every five years, they have no requirement to fulfill these goals. In addition to the non-binding aspect, the United States is required to donate $3 billion to the cause in support of other nations. On June 1^st, 2017, Donald Trump removed the United States

Reasoning

Although in theory, the Paris Agreement is a very good idea, when implemented, it is a very unfair deal for the United States. The issue is that the United States should not be focused internationally when there are many issues that we must first solve domestically. For example, 1/5^th of all the worlds emissions are from the United States. Instead of pledging $3 billion dollars to aid other nations, the United States should use this money to begin addressing their own issues. The money could be put towards improving current public transportation systems which have become run down in recent years, or it could be used as an incentive for companies to reduce their current level of emissions.

Solution

Even though we have left the agreement, the United States cannot simply ignore the problem of climate change. The United States should stick to the goals that they promised to fulfill through the Paris Agreement, but they should act independently and fix the issues at home first. The United States has proven many times that they are able to effectively accomplish their goals without pressure from the international community. We do not need an agreement to hold us accountable. The structure of the Paris Agreement is more to ensure that nations which do not normally conform to international standards will.

Conclusion

Climate change is not an issue that will go away soon. It will require constant action by the entire world to ensure that the world temperature stays at a relatively low level. The Paris Agreement is, in theory, a fantastic initiative, but for the time being the United States should not be a member. If in five years other nations prove that they are working to reduce their emission levels and are meeting the goals they promise then the United States could rejoin, but in the meantime it is in America’s best interest to act independently.

Memorandum on Paris Agreement

Memorandum on Paris Agreement

To: Donald Trump, President of the United States

From: Drew Nelson, Foreign Policy Expert

Date: 26 April 2018

Subject: Re-enter the Paris Agreement

Introduction

Trump recently stepped out of the Paris Agreement to fight climate change. However, he should rejoin it to ensure that the United States holds up their end of the deal. Instead of aiding developing nations, they should focus on fixing the problem that they have caused then help out when they are able to. 

Context

In 2015, former President Barack Obama joined the Paris Agreement to combat climate change with every country in the world, excluding Syria and Nicaragua. This was due to the fact that 2016 was the warmest year to date, with the other warmer years in the past decade. The ramifications of climate change are staggering and need to be curtailed to protect the environment. One major cause of climate change is carbon emissions which are currently at a high. Trump has recently stepped out of the agreement fearing that it would cost too much for business and the job market. One issue he had with the Agreement is the $3 billion that would be spent on countries that are developing and not able to support themselves as easily during this fight. The United States causes 1/5 of the problem and wants to focus on themselves.

Task

The task here is to make sure that the United States is reducing their carbon emissions and do their part to mitigate and prevent human-caused climate change. The United States also has to make sure that this is not detrimental to our economy and business. 

Solution

The solution to this issue is to rejoin the Paris Agreement. The United States is concerned with donating money to developing countries and aiding them in combating climate change. My solution to this would be to renegotiate the Agreement and use the money for themselves to fix the surmounting effects the United States has on carbon emissions. Once the US has found a way to fix this problem, maybe then they can revisit aiding developing countries as they will not be able to foot the bill on their own. By stepping out of the treaty, the United States has rid the Agreement of accountability. If they are not in it, what is preventing other countries from stepping out? The United States should be a role model and help lead the fight against climate change. 

Conclusion

Since climate change has become a significant issue globally, the United States should stay in the Paris Agreement. This will ensure that they hold up their end of the bargain and fight climate change. 

Memorandum on the Paris Climate Accords

TO: United States Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt

FROM: Kristen Fontaine 

DATE: 25 April 2018 

SUBJECT: The United States Re-entering the Paris Climate Accord

______________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY:  The Paris Climate Accords was adopted on December 12^th, 2015 , exhibiting an effort of the entire international community to combat the detrimental effects of global climate change. In 2017, President Trump announced that the United States would be withdrawing from the agreement, citing decreased national sovereignty and an effect on American jobs as his reasoning. However, the United States remains one of the largest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions and the only country not signed onto the Climate Agreement.. In order to both maintain our standing as an influential global power as well as promote our commitment to preventing climate change, the United States needs to rejoin the Paris Climate Accords.

CONTEXT: In recent years, the issue of climate change has become a pressing threat worldwide. As of 2015 15 out of the 16 hottest years were in the 21^st century (since 1880). In response to the issue, the Paris Climate Accord was negotiated and adopted by the 21^st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on December 12^th 2015. The Agreement included 196 parties, one of which was the United States This agreement exhibited a world-wide commitment to combat climate change, focusing on ending the burning of fossil fuels and keeping the global warming rate to below two degrees Celsius. Although the agreement is not legally binding, each country commits to specific pledges that outline their specific responsibility in limiting climate change. President Obama joined the Paris Climate Accord without the approval of Senate. Specifically,  the United States planned to reduce the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions by 26% by 2025. Additionally, President Obama pledged three billion dollars to fund efforts to reduce emissions in developing countries. On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced that the United States was going to be withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement. As reasoning for his decision, President Trump argued that the Paris Climate Accord threatened the United States economy and sovereignty, costing America 2.7 million jobs by 2025. In a previous statement, however, President Obama had claimed that the Paris agreement had been the longest streak of private-sector job creation in history. Trump’s move to withdraw from the Agreement will not officially go into effect until November 4, 2020; thus, the decision could still be overturned.

ALTERNATIVE: In this situation, the United States can take one of two routes—either remain withdrawn from the Paris Climate Agreement, or rejoin it. If the United States does not rejoin the Agreement, it poses serious threats not just to the progression of climate change, but also to our standing and legitimacy as an influential world power. The only logical option for the United States at this point is to rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement.

MAIN ARGUMENT: The reasons for the United States rejoining the Paris Climate Accords far overpower those for remaining withdrawn. Currently, the United States remains the only nation not signed into the agreement. Previously, Syria and Nicaragua had not joined the Agreement; however, they both joined in direct response to Trump’s announcement of United States withdrawal. With the United States serving as such an influential global power, not participating in this Agreement severely harms our legitimacy—especially in terms of environmental issues. President Trump has stated that he would consider rejoining if a better deal was brought to America by Europe; however, this statement does not promote the type of multilateral diplomacy that our nation has endorsed in the past. It is not the role of Europe to promote American interests—if the United States desires a certain change, we should work in conjunction with other participating nations while maintaining our membership in the Agreement. Currently, the United States accounts for about 1/5^th of global greenhouse gas emissions. If the United States does not rejoin the Paris Accords, it is estimated that the world will warm an additional 0.3 degrees Celsius by 2100 as a direct result. Even if the United States is no longer satisfied with our initial pledges in joining the Agreement, the UNFCC meets with the government every five years to reevaluate goals, tracking the long term process of climate change through an extremely transparent and accountable system. Overall, climate change is a serious issue that the United States should prioritize, but cannot do so unless we rejoin the Paris Climate Accords.  

CONCLUSION: Overall, it is vital for the United States to rejoin the rest of the international community in the Paris Climate Accords. Although President Trump should not have withdrawn from the Agreement in the first place, it is not too late for him to rescind his decision or for a future administration to overturn it. Every other member of the international community has pledged their commitment to combat climate change; however, without the commitment of the United States—one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions—the goals of the Paris Accords will not be possible.