Representatives from more than 160 countries will gather this morning at United Nations headquarters in New York to sign the Paris Agreement, taking a significant step toward bringing the climate change accord into force. Secretary of State John Kerry will sign the agreement for the U.S.
The Paris Agreement was adopted in December during the 21st session of the Conference of the Parties (COP21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, which the new deal will replace, the Paris Agreement represents the world’s first universal international treaty to address climate change, requiring action not just from developed nations but from developing nations as well.
The universal form of the agreement addresses one of the major issues that kept the U.S. out of the Kyoto Protocol, Elliot Diringer, executive vice president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES), told reporters during a press call Thursday. “The big objection to the Kyoto Protocol was that it exempted developing countries. The Paris Agreement ends that imbalance, it establishes common commitments for all countries, and it provides the means to hold them accountable,” he explained.
That’s certainly not stopping Republicans in Congress from disapproving of the agreement. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and ardent denier of climate change, released a white paper Thursday arguing against U.S. involvement in the agreement.
“The problem with international climate change agreements is that they ignore basic economic and political realities and therefore are doomed to failure. When the hype over the signing fades, the reality will set in that the policies President Obama is promising will not last,” Inhofe said in a statement.
Under the Paris Agreement, the U.S. has committed to reducing its carbon emissions 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.
While the accord’s opponents have been making a lot of noise in Congress, it just noise, Diringer said. “There is no sign at all of a concerted effort on the Hill to challenge the president’s authority to accept the agreement as an executive agreement.”
Throughout the negotiation process, the U.S. was adamant that in order for the nation to be a party to the agreement, it could not include legally binding targets and timelines. If the agreement did include such language, it would need to be ratified by Congress.
Potentially a greater threat to the nation’s involvement in the agreement is the upcoming election. Both main contenders in the Republican primary, Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) have openly aired their doubts about climate science.
Diringer seemed unfazed by this possibility as well, saying it would be a mistake for any future president to back out of the deal. “Whatever we might hear during the campaign, conducting foreign affairs is very different from campaigning, and any incoming president would have to weigh those risks very carefully,” he said.
Abandoning the agreement would risk “serious diplomatic consequences,” he said. “Walking away from the agreement would instantly turn the U.S. from a leader to a defector. It would almost certainly trigger a major diplomatic backlash, making it much harder to win other country’s support for our international priorities.”
Regardless of who wins the presidency, the international community itself could stave off a U.S. departure from the agreement for a while at least by bringing it into force early.
Backing out of a treaty before it is brought into force is much easier than doing so after it has taken effect. Once the rule is brought into force, there is a four-year lag period before a country can officially drop out. So, if the agreement takes effect before the next president takes office, it would be more difficult for them to remove the U.S.
For the rule to come into force at least 55 countries representing 55 percent of global emissions must sign the agreement and submit to the UNFCCC documents of ratification, acceptance, or approval. A small group of developing nations representing roughly .02 percent of global emissions will sign and submit that documentation in New York today; for the rest of the signatories, inking the agreement is only the first step.
China and the U.S., the world’s top two carbon emitters, will sign the agreement today and have indicated their intentions to submit documentation, joining the agreement officially by the end of the year. Together, these two nations represent nearly 40 percent of global emissions.
Initially, the Paris Agreement was supposed to take effect in 2020. At some point during the December negotiations, however, that timeline was removed. It remains a mystery as to who is responsible for the change. Dropping the 2020 language makes it possible for the agreement to come into force much earlier than previously expected.
“[Early entry into force is] significant because it demonstrates a commitment by countries to honor the commitments they made in Paris to start adopting policy to carry them forward to put forward long-term decarbonization plans, to participate actively in the rulemaking process,” Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy for the Union of Concerned Scientists, told reporters during Thursday’s press conference.
