Riccardo Liguori The Trump administration's decision to abandon the Loss and Damage Fund has drawn criticism from around the world. The withdrawal means, among other things, depriving vulnerable countries of the support they need to manage the effects of the climate crisis (which they did not help to create).
@Canva
The United States has withdrawn from the Loss and Damage Fund, a financial mechanism to compensate poorer countries for the damage caused by global warming. This move is a new chapter in U.S. climate policy and reopens the question of the role of wealthier states in addressing climate change.
The Trump administration’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Cop28 Loss and Damage Fund has triggered a whirlwind of international condemnation and dismay. The fund was a crucial step toward climate justice. And now the withdrawal by the world’s largest economy and biggest past emitter of greenhouse gases risks undermining confidence in multilateral efforts and depriving the exposed countries of the promised financial guarantee.
A betrayed climate commitment
The Loss and Damage Fund was the result of years of arm-twisting and negotiations by countries most affected by climate change. The deal struck at Cop28 in 2023 was seen as a turning point, recognizing the responsibility of wealthier nations for the devastation of the environment that poorer nations are experiencing. But the U.S. financial contribution had already been small: only $17.5 million, a small fraction of the real needs. Now, the full withdrawal casts a shadow on the U.S.’s pledge to combat climate change.
Global reactions: outrage and concern
The decision has been criticized strongly by experts, politicians, and activists around the world. Mohamed Adow, executive director of Power Shift Africa think tank, was firm in his belief that America’s withdrawal is a disturbing message to the world that jeopardizes gains made and undermines the solidarity that will assist in combating the climate crisis. Rachel Rose Jackson of Corporate Accountability lamented the action as a “wrecking ball” for global climate change mitigation.
Ali Mohamed, chairman of the African Group of Negotiators, highlighted that this move puts at risk essential support to most vulnerable countries severely affected by devastating weather conditions. Insufficient funding will continue to leave millions of the most vulnerable in the worst-affected countries without relief from devastating impacts of desertification, droughts, and floods.
A step backward
This is not the first withdrawal of the Trump administration from global climate commitments. In 2017, the president withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement and then had President Biden return. Now this newest withdrawal reaffirms a policy of isolationism to environmental diplomacy and a return to fossil fuel extraction policies. Trump’s policy of encouraging the oil industry and disempowering federal environmental protection agencies threatens to worsen the climate crisis.
The price of doing nothing
Impacts from global warming already can be felt, even here in the United States. Climatic weather extremities such as the California blazes and flooding of Florida are already running in billions of dollars. Denial of the urgency to have cooperative collective action may carry even bigger expenses, economically as well as humanity-wise.
Meanwhile, the world’s biggest current greenhouse gas polluter, China, is investing heavily in renewable energy, leading the way. The United States, however, risks falling behind both environmentally and economically if it simply continues to focus on fossil fuels and dodges its portion of climate responsibilities.
At the same time, the world’s most vulnerable countries continue to suffer, with fewer and fewer resources, from an environmental and climate crisis they did not create.
