Despite President Donald Trump’s call to withdraw the U.S. from the UN Paris climate pact, top U.S. diplomats continue “to implement the Paris Agreement.” And, many climate activists are not too worried the U.S. will ever actually officially withdraw.
“A perception floats in public that under President Trump the US has stepped out of the Paris Agreement. But, at [the ] Katowice, [Poland UN climate summit] we find that the US is as deeply engaged at the moment in several negotiations behind closed doors,” noted President Obama’s former UN climate envoy Todd Stern in an interview with the Business Standard.
Despite President Trump’s big announcement in June 2017 that the U.S. would be withdrawing from the UN Paris pact, negotiators from the state department were sent to the UN summit continue to craft the Paris agreement.
“I think that the career civil service diplomats who have been doing what they’ve been doing over the last two years – many of them have been there for a long time – they worked with President Bush, they worked with Democrats and with Republicans,” Stern explained.
“So our technical people have been acting in a professional manner in a way that has been designed to implement the Paris agreement, to bring it to life with these rules and procedures and guidelines and so forth and have been doing that in a way meant to be faithful to the Paris Agreement,” Stern added.
Stern leaves no doubt about his contempt for President Trump. “I would not take one second to try to justify President Trump’s policy on climate change, either internationally or domestically. I disagree — with basically everything he’s doing,” Stern said.
But Stern does not seem too worried that the U.S. will actually withdraw from the UN Paris pact.
“But look it is the call, the decision of the Trump administration as to whether to send people [to the UN climate summit in Poland]. It’s not like anybody’s been doing something that they’re not supposed to be doing. Top administration could cut-off completely and we to switch off the US team anytime they want. They could have switched off the US team the day after the President gave his speech in the Rose Garden. But they’ve made the judgment that made sense to have US team. It is a much smaller team. They have not at all had the kind of prominent role that the US had in the past,” Stern said.
Another prominent climate activist not worried that the U.S. will actually withdraw is former Vice President Al Gore. See: Gore not worried about Trump’s UN Paris exit: No exit until after 2020 election – ‘A new president could simply give 30 days’ notice, and we’re right back in’
Gore noted that the first date that the U.S. can officially withdraw from the Paris pact is the day after the 2020 presidential election. “If there’s a new president — excuse me for a moment,” Gore said in August 2018, “then a new president could simply give 30 days’ notice, and we’re right back in the Paris agreement.”
#
Excerpt:
During the recent UN climate summit in Poland,
Former Obama UN climate envoy Todd Stern: I won’t justify Trump’s climate change policy for a second
Obama’s UN climate envoy Todd Stern: US diplomats are working in Katowice (Poland) to implement the Paris Agreement, says Todd Stern, who was one of the architects of the Paris Agreement as America’s special envoy on climate change when Barack Obama was president.
A perception floats in public that under President Trump the US has stepped out of the Paris Agreement. But, at Katowice we find that the US is as deeply engaged at the moment in several negotiations behind closed doors. Some portray the US here attempting to rework the Paris Agreement through the rulebook in a shape that President Trump would also accept eventually. Would you agree with that view?
Definitely No.
Question: Could you then explain what is the US doing here at Katowice then?
I disagree with that actually. I would not take one second to try to justify President Trump’s policy on climate change, either internationally or domestically. I disagree. With basically everything he’s doing. I think he’s completely wrongheaded – his approach and the approach of many of the political people he’s brought in to EPA etc. So what I’m saying now has nothing to do with defending top administration. I could not disagree more. On climate change and most other things.
But, I think that the career civil service diplomats who have been doing what they’ve been doing over the last two years – many of them have been there for a long time – they worked with President Bush, they worked with democrats and with republicans.
I am a political person but I have enormous respect for the career people who serve administrations of both kinds. The people who have been in the lingo of international diplomacy those are the technical people and then there are political people in the sense that they’re basically ministerial level and above. So our technical people have been acting in a professional manner in a way that has been designed to implement the Paris agreement, to bring it to life with these rules and procedures and guidelines and so forth and have been doing that in a way meant to be faithful to the Paris Agreement.
So the Paris agreement means sort of different to different people and lies in the eyes of the beholder. But I don’t have much disagreement at all with what I’ve seen come out of the US side when it comes to mitigation, transparency or other things, they have been pretty straight up.
I find it contradictory that President Trump has said he’d like to get out of the Paris Agreement but the negotiators who represent him and work under his command are in some sense actually trying to deliver on the Paris agreement from whichever perspective they think the Paris agreement should deliver. Isn’t there a contradiction there?
I don’t think there’s a contradiction exactly but I can certainly see it looking puzzling to people from the outside. But look it is the call, the decision of the Trump administration as to whether to send people. It’s not like anybody’s been doing something that they’re not supposed to be doing. Top administration could cut-off completely and we to switch off the US team anytime they want. They could have switched off the US team the day after the President gave his speech in the Rose Garden. But they’ve made the judgment that made sense to have US team. It is a much smaller team. They have not at all had the kind of prominent role that the US had in the past. But they are honestly people I think there are many, many negotiators from countries who tend to agree with the United States.
In some countries you tend not to agree to the United States to respect the work that they do and the knowledge that they have the expertise that they have over the two of us.
