The United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement has raised significant concerns among global climate advocates, with Amnesty International describing the move as a “disturbing precedent” capable of initiating a “race to the bottom.” The withdrawal, according to Marta Schaaf, Amnesty’s Programme Director for Climate, ESJ, and Corporate Accountability, could hinder global efforts to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change. Schaaf highlighted that the U.S. decision threatens to dismantle cooperative action on climate goals, reversing more than a decade of progress under the agreement as reported by JURIST.
President Donald Trump announced his intention to exit the Paris Agreement at the start of his second term, symbolizing a pivot towards fossil fuel commitment. Although the formal withdrawal required a year to take effect, the actions of the United States have cast a shadow on international climate policy. Despite leaving the agreement, the United States still holds “legal obligations to protect humanity” from climate change impacts, according to a 2025 Advisory Opinion by the International Court of Justice.
The Paris Agreement, instituted in 2016, serves as a global roadmap to limit the rise in global temperatures. It aims to maintain the increase well below 2°C, striving for a limit of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The U.S. withdrawal undermines these targets, potentially emboldening other nations to deprioritize their climate commitments. The move has spurred criticism and concern over the message it sends to the international community regarding climate responsibility. Global leaders and environmental organizations emphasize the necessity of re-establishing solidarity and the urgent momentum needed to combat climate change.
Across the Atlantic, there appears to be a contrasting shift toward stronger environmental accountability. In October 2025, a significant majority of Europeans expressed that large corporations should be responsible for human rights and environmental violations across their supply chains. This reflects a growing awareness and insistence on environmental protection at the corporate level.
Amnesty International warns of potential coercive tactics by the U.S. to influence other countries to support fossil fuel reliance. Schaaf remarked on the precarious position of U.S.-based climate advocates, who must now navigate a complex battle with consequences extending to future generations. She calls on those witnessing climate change’s adverse effects who can speak safely to raise their voices, urging governments globally to oppose coercive measures and sustain the acceleration of climate action.
The United States’ decision stands in stark contrast to the commitments of other nations, joining a limited list of countries not party to the Paris Agreement, including Iran, Libya, and Yemen. This decision highlights the critical juncture at which global climate policy and cooperative international efforts currently stand.