Since 2017, Donald Trump has caused a stir around the world with his announcement that the United States, one of the largest producers of greenhouse gases, will withdraw from the Paris Agreement (Denchak & Hu, 2025). Therefore, this decision is considered to be one that will shift the political landscape, triggering major shifts in several global leadership positions related to climate issues.

Figure 1.1 shows that the GDP per capita of the USA is quite high, located on the right side of the graph, and the EPI score is between 55 and 60, which is not considered high despite the high GDP. In addition, Figure 1.1 also shows that the USA is slightly below the trend line, which can be interpreted as meaning that its performance on environmental issues is slightly below average when compared to countries with a similar population to the USA.

Data Sources : Environmental Performance Index (EPI), (2024)

In addition, there is a significant disparity between current climate policy commitments and the ambitious targets set out in the Paris Agreement, highlighting the need for more transformative action to close this gap (Huang et al., 2024). However, the Paris Agreement requires several countries to take strategic steps in reducing GHG emissions in their respective countries, but this has had a significant impact on developing countries in particular. This is in line with research from Perugini et al. (2021), which indicates that developing countries face numerous obligations to provide reports or conditions with limited data and capacity. Looking at the current state of the United States, there are three things that Donald Trump is concerned about, namely, the economy, politics, and ideology.

To begin with, Donald Trump stated that the US commitment to the Paris Agreement could harm the US economy, particularly in the coal and oil sectors. In addition, strict emission regulations could reduce employment and place a burden on the US manufacturing industry. Therefore, Donald Trump wants to take preventive measures by reviving the declining coal industry, even though the global trend is shifting toward renewable energy. This is supported by DePillis, (2025) by the fact that Donald Trump has no great ambition or desire to be part of addressing climate change in the world. Therefore, these factors have prompted the US to reevaluate its role in implementing the Paris Agreement, as it can be concluded that Donald Trump believes that the transition to renewable energy puts the US at a disadvantage under the Paris Agreement.

Furthermore, Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement has become one of his strengths in attracting supporters who have long been opposed to environmental regulations in the US. However, carbon balancing approaches have the potential to create mechanisms whereby governments and corporations can indirectly shift responsibility for emissions reductions to third parties (Cullenward et al., 2023). Therefore, the implementation of the Paris Agreement needs to be reevaluated and adjusted to the capacity and national priorities of each country. This could be a consideration for Donald Trump not to oppose the Paris Agreement, but to implement policies or regulations that can be adjusted to the conditions and situation in the US. For example, fossil fuels could still be used, but with maximum usage standards in the US. In addition, this policy could be implemented earlier in the G20 countries, as they are the highest contributors to global CO2 emissions. This is related to previous research that the G20 members are predicted to contribute 85% of GDP and 80% of carbon emissions in the world's energy sector (Sucahyo & Arsala Rahmani, 2023)

On the other hand, Donald Trump's leadership has become highly controversial, with his ideological actions reflecting his skepticism toward the environment and science around the world. This statement is justified by Bailey & Bhardwaj, (2023) that investing in renewable energy is no longer economically viable. This can be analogized that investing in renewable energy does not benefit the country but instead has a negative impact, due to the Paris Agreement regulations that are no longer in line with the needs of each member country, one of which is the US. Therefore, this is in line with the results of research which shows that global financial flows for climate action still require clear policies to provide guidance to global policymakers so that policy outcomes can be implemented and adapted to the needs of each country in the world.

Finally, If the climate crisis has prompted the world to reflect, as the decline of even one superpower such as the US leaving the Paris Agreement has done, then a new paradigm has been established: that sustainability cannot be reliant on fragile political commitments, but rather on more inclusive, adaptive, and action-driven global collaboration. This problem doesn't mean the end of multilateralism; it's a measure of how grown-up our society is. This might be the time when the world, no matter how many superpowers it has, finally finds a better way to work together that is smarter, braver, and more united. This would be a system that not only connects fates but also policies. The climate catastrophe tells us one thing: if we all work together, we can always find a way to solve problems. This time, we have to make those answers last.

Note: The cover image accompanying this article was generated using artificial intelligence and is intended for illustrative purposes only