Trump’s rejection of the Paris Climate Accord – motivation and goal and Long term consequences

June 3, 2017

America helmed by Trump is not merely just retreating from everything significant…but by rejecting the Paris climate accord, it has created a vacuum of leadership that has traditionally been driven by the US. This is not only a mere retreat, but in the greater scheme of the geoeconomics chessboard it is a strategic nightmare as it hands over to China the mantle of leadership… set a both the instructional and directional speed and trajectory of not only where the world should go with climate….but everything else as well from how we should trade in the future to what rules should govern his economic framework…to setting the future financial infrastructure by which all countries in the world trade.

Pulling out of the Paris accord is not just merely saying, we the US are not very interested in this for the time being…as we have more pressing issues to look at. If anything it is an act that is likely to transform the US from a global influencer into a nobody.

China will just just pick up what the US throws away, step up to the plate and write the rules of how the game is played.


‘This is a political move to appease the conservatives who Trump believes accounts for his political bedrock – in doing so, he has summarily written off the melinnials and metropoles who he has long since considered as a lost cause that is not worth wooing…it makes sense. However, the environment is not just about protecting the great abstraction of a hole the size of Alaska somewhere in uppereaches of the ozone layer…if it were simply that. Then whether the US stays or goes or even decides to sleep in would hardly be an issue. The environment currently accounts for a large part of how trade and commerce is conducted – EPA guidelines don’t just serve as benchmarks, they feature in everything from how many hours a mobile phone can run without exploding in your pocket and sataying your gulis to how many blades a commercial jet engine should have and at what rotation speed they should be set and at what burn rates to either produce X,Y or Z emissions and this regulatory framework that determines how things are manufactured, used and disposed extends to everything within the aegis of what we call products and services….it’s scope is staggering…when one sees it from that standpoint the US position to retreat rather than to stay the course is tragic in so many ways.

To say that China can step into this power vacuum is to take solace in the idea of nominating Count Dracula as the CEO of the blood bank – as China is a major polluter. So I

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: