The irony of the new president of the United States of America signing an executive order withdrawing the country, for the second time under his watch, from the Paris climate pact even as California struggles to recover from wildfires — the changing climate has exacerbated the phenomenon — cannot be ignored. Donald Trump also ordered the shutdown of government offices and programmes that sought to protect the poor from the ravages of the climate, indicated a robust return to the carbon economy besides negating a number of climate sensitive policies, such as a ban on the exploration of oil in large parts of the Arctic. The impact of these measures on America’s worsening climate crisis will be significant: worse, a president indifferent to and defiant of an existential crisis might have a cascading effect, hardening public opinion on climate change. This is not to suggest that the US has been an exemplar on climate action. Oil and gas production had increased, the US remained the world’s largest crude oil producer, and, in 2022, became the biggest exporter of liquified natural gas — all under a Democrat dispensation. Mr Trump has now opened the taps to full flow.

The consequences of the US’s withdrawal from the Paris treaty on global climate change mitigatory action are worrying. The US is the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases and its criminal unconcern with its own complicity may encourage other emitters to be equally complacent. As it is, the Paris treaty mechanism works on the principle of voluntary pledges. Other areas of concern are the possibility of the shrinking of funds — something that the World Health Organization will also have to suffer on account of the US’s rejection of that institution — and obstacles to the transfer of technology to smaller economies threatened with climate change. Within the US, the federal edifice could compensate for some of the damages being wrought by Mr Trump. States, cities, businesses and corporations would now have to shoulder additional responsibilities in battling climate change. The international order may also need a similar realignment if it is interested in saving the planet. A new multilateral bloc, comprising China, India, Russia and western European nations, serious about pressing ahead with existing as well as evolving climate action interventions may bring pressure on transactional deviants such as Mr Trump to mend his ways. But can a conscientious collective like that take shape? The necessary political will and consensus remain in short supply.