Last year, President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris climate accord. The Paris Agreement has an “upward” structure unlike most international environmental treaties, which are “top down”, characterized by internationally defined standards and objectives that states must implement.  Unlike its predecessor, the Kyoto Protocol, which sets legal commitment targets, the Paris Agreement, which focuses on consensual training, allows for voluntary and national objectives.  Specific climate targets are therefore politically promoted and not legally binding. Only the processes governing reporting and revision of these objectives are imposed by international law. This structure is particularly noteworthy for the United States – in the absence of legal mitigation or funding objectives, the agreement is seen as an “executive agreement, not a treaty.” Since the 1992 UNFCCC treaty was approved by the Senate, this new agreement does not require further legislation from Congress for it to enter into force.  In short, the agreement does not eliminate coal jobs, it only transfers those jobs from the United States and the United States and ships them abroad. This agreement is not so much about climate as it is about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States. The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris Agreement — they went wild; they were so happy – for the simple reason that it put our country, the United States of America, which we all love, in a very, very great economic disadvantage.
A cynic would say that the obvious reason for the economic competitors and their desire to stay in the agreement is that we continue to suffer this great self-inflicted economic injury. It would be very difficult to compete with other countries in other parts of the world. National communication reports often cover several hundred pages and cover a country`s actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as a description of its weaknesses and effects of climate change.  National communications are established in accordance with guidelines adopted by the UNFCCC Conference of Parties. Contributions (planned) at the national level (NDC), which form the basis of the Paris Agreement, are shorter and less detailed, but also follow a standard structure and are subject to technical review by experts. While the agreement has been welcomed by many, including French President Francois Hollande and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, criticism has also emerged. James Hansen, a former NASA scientist and climate change expert, expressed anger that most of the agreement is made up of “promises” or goals, not firm commitments.  He called the Paris talks a fraud with “nothing, only promises” and believed that only a generalized tax on CO2 emissions, which is not part of the Paris agreement, would force CO2 emissions down fast enough to avoid the worst effects of global warming.  At the 2011 UN Climate Change Conference, the Durban Platform (and the ad hoc working group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action) were created to negotiate a legal instrument for climate action from 2020.