The U.S. withdraws from UNFCCC following a directive signed by Donald J. Trump, marking the most far-reaching reversal of American participation in international climate governance since the framework’s creation more than three decades ago.
In a presidential memorandum released Wednesday, the White House ordered the United States to exit the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change alongside 65 other international organizations and treaties deemed to “no longer serve American interests.” Roughly half of the listed bodies are United Nations entities. The decision moves beyond withdrawal from the Paris Agreement—already set to become official on January 20—and targets the treaty architecture that underpins global climate cooperation.
From Paris to the treaty framework itself
Established in 1992 and ratified unanimously by the U.S. Senate, the UNFCCC provides the legal foundation for annual negotiations among nearly 200 countries. It does not mandate emissions cuts; rather, it sets a collective objective to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations at levels that prevent dangerous human interference with the climate system. Under its auspices, countries negotiated the Kyoto Protocol in 1995 and the Paris Agreement in 2015.
Withdrawal from the UNFCCC would remove the United States from those negotiations altogether once a formal notice is filed and a one-year clock elapses. The administration has already taken steps to leave the Paris Agreement for a second time, but exiting the UNFCCC itself would place the U.S. outside the treaty framework that enables any return to Paris.
A broader retreat from multilateral bodies
The memorandum cites Executive Order 14199, issued on February 4, 2025, which directed a comprehensive review of U.S. participation in international organizations. After receiving the Secretary of State’s findings, the President ordered agencies to cease participation in and funding to the listed bodies “to the extent permitted by law.”
Among the organizations named are the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Renewable Energy Agency, the International Solar Alliance, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature, as well as numerous UN departments and commissions. In a statement, Marco Rubio said institutions originally designed to foster peace and cooperation had become a “sprawling architecture of global governance” detached from national interests.
Legal uncertainty and diplomatic consequences
Because the Senate ratified the UNFCCC in 1992, legal scholars say a president’s authority to unilaterally withdraw remains unsettled; the Supreme Court has never ruled definitively on the issue. Past precedent exists—President George W. Bush withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002—but experts disagree on whether a future administration could rejoin the UNFCCC without another Senate vote.
Critics argue the move isolates the United States at a moment when many allies are deepening their climate commitments. Former officials described the withdrawal as damaging to U.S. influence over global standards, investment flows, and scientific cooperation, while warning it could cede ground to competitors in clean-energy technologies. The administration counters that global climate diplomacy will continue without U.S. participation and that resources should be redirected toward priorities aligned with national interests.
Once finalized, the withdrawal would leave the United States outside a near-universal treaty for the first time since its adoption, reshaping how—and whether—the country engages in collective climate action in the years ahead.
Bottom Line
The United States is moving to exit the UNFCCC itself, not just the Paris Agreement, severing participation in the treaty framework that anchors global climate negotiations.
Key Insights
- The withdrawal directive spans 66 organizations, signaling a broader recalibration of U.S. multilateral engagement beyond climate.
- Exiting the UNFCCC would remove the U.S. from annual negotiations among nearly 200 countries once the one-year notice period concludes.
- Legal authority to withdraw from a Senate-ratified treaty remains contested, complicating future re-entry pathways.
- The move extends to climate science and energy bodies, including the IPCC and IRENA.
Strategic Takeaway
For governments and institutions, the decision redraws the landscape of climate diplomacy: the U.S. steps outside the treaty architecture that shapes rules, finance, and science, with implications for alliances, competitiveness, and the credibility of collective climate governance.
RELATED STORIES:
Follow SDG News on LinkedIn
