If U.S. President Donald Trump has his way, the United States will not be alone in its controversial campaign to expand fossil fuel production while sidelining critical environmental regulations. The Trump administration has spent months championing the U.S. fossil fuel industry, undermining federal climate research, dismantling regulations designed to reduce pollution, and dismissing the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change.
Now, this fossil fuel crusade is being taken global, with the administration making moves to pressure international organizations and other nations to follow its lead. At the U.N. General Assembly in New York City, Trump proclaimed that climate change is “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world,” warning that countries clinging to what he termed a “green scam” would face economic failure.
By promoting fossil fuel reliance, Trump is bolstering an industry that has historically driven economic growth in the United States. As the world’s largest oil producer and natural gas exporter, the U.S. government is focused on ramping up domestic production in a bid for what it calls “energy dominance.” A key aspect of this strategy includes stoking global demand for fossil fuels.
Experts are quick to point out that this approach serves the interests of the U.S. fossil fuel sector. Tom Moerenhout, a research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, noted, “It is in their interest to convince as many countries as possible to maintain reliance on oil and gas so that the U.S. can be a reliable exporter.”
However, the environmental implications of burning fossil fuels are dire. These practices release significant amounts of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, which scientists overwhelmingly agree are driving global warming. The consequences have become increasingly evident as nations grapple with the effects of climate change, including record-breaking temperatures and intensified natural disasters like floods and heatwaves.
Amidst this, the demand for affordable energy continues to rise globally, creating a lucrative market for fossil fuels. China, a key geopolitical rival, has been rapidly advancing in the clean energy sector, investing hundreds of billions of dollars into electric vehicles, wind, and solar technologies. This has allowed China to dominate green supply chains and export affordable clean energy technologies worldwide.
Alice Hill, a climate expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, remarked, “Clean energy is spreading at a pace that no one would have anticipated 20 years ago.” She further highlighted that the U.S. strategy appears aimed at dissuading other nations from embracing China’s clean energy advancements.
In pursuit of its fossil fuel agenda, the Trump administration has not hesitated to exert pressure through trade threats and by undermining international agreements aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Reports indicate that the administration is pushing the World Bank to increase lending for fossil fuel projects, while also using its influence in development banks to prioritize fossil fuel investments over green initiatives.
The International Energy Agency (IEA), a key global energy organization, has become a significant target for Trump’s administration. The IEA’s forecasts suggesting that global oil, gas, and coal demand will peak by 2030, due to the rise of electric vehicles and renewable energy, clash with the administration’s ambitions. As a member state, the U.S. contributes about 14 percent of the IEA’s budget, which the Trump administration has threatened to withdraw if its forecasts do not align with the U.S. fossil fuel agenda.
Chris Wright, U.S. Energy Secretary, has made it clear that the administration intends to either reform the IEA or withdraw from it entirely, stating, “My strong preference is to reform it.” In response to these pressures, IEA officials are considering revamping their forecasts to present a more favorable outlook for fossil fuel demand.
Furthermore, Trump has leveraged his trade war with various countries to secure fossil fuel deals. Notably, the European Union has agreed to purchase $750 billion worth of U.S. energy resources over three years, although energy analysts have raised questions about the feasibility of such a commitment. South Korea and Japan have also pledged to invest heavily in U.S. energy infrastructure and purchase significant amounts of liquefied natural gas.
Despite Trump’s aggressive tactics, experts suggest that many nations are wary of confronting the U.S. head-on. Hill remarked, “Few nations want to have a head-on confrontation,” suggesting an inclination to avoid drawing attention to their own climate strategies in the hopes of escaping Trump’s scrutiny.
As global momentum for green energy continues to build, the efficacy of Trump’s rejection of renewable technologies remains in question. Joshua Busby, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, noted, “Other countries are increasingly going to want to embrace technologies of the future.” The path forward for international climate action may depend on how resilient the global community becomes in the face of the Trump administration’s push for fossil fuels.
