Trump pulls US out of key climate treaty and dozens of international organisations

Among the most notable exits is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the foundational agreement underpinning international efforts to combat global warming. The US has also pulled out of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), widely regarded as the leading authority on climate science.

The White House said the decision followed a broad review of 66 organisations, nearly half of which are linked to the United Nations. Officials argued that these institutions no longer serve US interests and instead promote what they described as “globalist” or “ideological” agendas.

In a statement, the administration said the move would end US funding for groups that support climate policies, international governance initiatives, and social programmes it considers inconsistent with national priorities. It also described many of the organisations as an inefficient use of taxpayer money.

The withdrawal extends beyond climate-focused bodies. Other affected organisations include the International Solar Alliance, the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, and the Global Counter-Terrorism Forum, reflecting a broader retreat from multilateral cooperation.

Experts have raised concerns about the potential consequences, particularly for global climate research. Sources indicate that restrictions on US scientists—such as limits on attending international meetings—could delay upcoming IPCC reports, including key assessments that guide governments on emissions reductions.

Although the withdrawal from the UNFCCC will take up to a year to complete, observers note that US engagement with the treaty had already diminished significantly. The move follows the country’s earlier exit from the Paris Agreement and its absence from recent climate negotiations, including COP30.

The legal framework surrounding treaty withdrawal remains unclear under US law, raising questions about whether future administrations could easily reverse the decision.

International reaction has been largely critical. European leaders warned that the move risks undermining global cooperation on climate and other shared challenges. Within the US, advocacy groups such as the Union of Concerned Scientists described the decision as a significant setback for science-based policymaking and international collaboration.

Overall, analysts say the withdrawals signal a broader shift away from multilateral engagement, with potential implications for climate action, scientific cooperation, and global governance.