The Paris Agreement: Architectural Resilience and the Challenge of US Political Volatility

Executive Summary: The Paris Agreement and the Challenge of US Volatility

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the Paris Agreement's legal and operational architecture and examines its resilience in the face of profound political volatility from the United States, the world's second-largest greenhouse gas emitter.1 The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, is a landmark international treaty designed to guide the global effort to combat climate change for decades.2 Its central objective is to hold the global average temperature increase to "well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C".3

The Agreement's durability stems from its novel "hybrid" architecture. This design uniquely combines:

1. "Bottom-up" Pledges: A system of non-binding, nationally-set targets known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).5

2. "Top-down" Rules: A legally binding, "ratchet mechanism" for escalating ambition, managed through a 5-year cycle of collective review (the Global Stocktake, or GST) and universal reporting rules (the Enhanced Transparency Framework, or ETF).5

This report details this architecture and frames it against the central narrative of US political "whiplash," which has become a primary test of the Agreement's design. This volatility has manifested in a four-part sequence:

1. The First Withdrawal (2017-2020): The Trump administration announced its intent to withdraw in 2017, citing "unfair economic burdens" 9, and formally exited the Agreement on November 4, 2020.10

2. The Re-entry (2021): The Biden administration rejoined the Agreement on February 19, 2021, and submitted a new, more ambitious NDC (a 50-52% reduction by 2030).11

3. The Second Withdrawal (2025-2026): On January 20, 2025, the Trump administration again initiated the one-year withdrawal process, this time justifying the move with ideological rejections of climate action as a "con job".11

4. The Subnational Response (2017-Present): In response, a "shadow" US climate movement, the "America Is All In" coalition, has mobilized to uphold the Agreement's goals from outside the federal government.16

The central thesis of this analysis is that the Agreement's decentralized, "whole-of-society" design has proven legally resilient to the exit of a keystone Party.18 However, the chronic unreliability of the United States 20 has created a profound ambition and finance deficit. This has provided "political cover" for other major emitters to slow their own efforts 21 and critically jeopardizes the 1.5°C goal.

This report concludes with the current 2025 landscape. The world is grappling with the findings of the first Global Stocktake—that the world is "not on track" 7—and the contentious new climate finance goal (NCQG) established at COP29 in Baku.24 As the world prepares for the critical COP30 summit in Belem, Brazil, it faces a slate of "woefully inadequate" new NDCs 21 and the unprecedented scenario of a "shadow" US delegation of subnational actors 25 attending in place of an official federal delegation.26

Part I: The Architecture of the Paris Agreement

A Landmark Global Treaty: From Adoption to Implementation

The Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change, adopted by 196 Parties at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) in Paris, France, on December 12, 2015.2 It marked the culmination of decades of negotiations and represented a new consensus-based approach to global climate action.

The Agreement's entry into force was unprecedented in its speed, a reflection of a deliberate political strategy. The treaty stipulated it would enter into force 30 days after the date on which "at least 55 Parties to the Convention accounting in total for at least an estimated 55% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions" had deposited their instruments of ratification.27 This dual threshold was achieved on October 5, 2016, and the Agreement formally entered into force just one month later on November 4, 2016.2 This rapid timeline—less than 11 months from adoption—was strategically pushed by its architects, including the Obama administration, to "lock in" the Agreement's legal framework before the US presidential election later that month. This speed ensured that any subsequent administration would be bound by the treaty's specific, time-delayed withdrawal provisions.

The Agreement's central purpose is articulated in its Article 2. This article establishes a three-pillar, long-term goal to strengthen the global response to climate change, explicitly "in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty".4

The three pillars of Article 2.1 are:

1. Mitigation: The long-term temperature goal (LTTG). This is the Agreement's most prominent provision, committing Parties to "Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change".2

2. Adaptation: "Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production".1

3. Finance: "Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development".1

The dual-target mitigation language ("well below 2°C" and "pursuing 1.5°C") was a masterful diplomatic compromise. The 2°C target represented the existing political consensus built since the 2009 Cancun Agreements.30 The 1.5°C language, however, was a crucial inclusion demanded by the Climate Vulnerable Forum and Small Island Developing States, for whom a 2°C rise represented an existential threat. By including 1.5°C, even as an aspirational "effort," the Agreement created a powerful "ambition anchor." This anchor was subsequently validated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its 2018 Special Report on 1.5°C 30, which detailed the significantly graver risks of exceeding 1.5°C. As a result, 1.5°C has become the de facto benchmark for high ambition within the Agreement's framework.

The "Ratchet Mechanism": An Engine for Escalating Ambition

The Paris Agreement's operational "engine" is its "ratchet mechanism," a cyclical process designed to steadily increase global ambition over time.5 This engine is built from two primary, interconnected components: the "bottom-up" Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the "top-down" Global Stocktake (GST).

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs): A New Hybrid Architecture

NDCs are the "heart" of the Paris Agreement.6 They are the individual national climate action plans submitted by each Party, outlining how it intends to reduce its national emissions and adapt to climate impacts.5

This "bottom-up" approach, where countries self-define their own targets 5 based on "different national circumstances" 4 and "respective capabilities" 33, was the Agreement's essential political breakthrough. It solved the deadlock of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which had created a rigid firewall by imposing binding, "top-down" emission-reduction targets only on developed nations. This bifurcation was a political non-starter for the United States (which never ratified it) and excluded major emerging emitters. The Paris Agreement's new model requires all Parties—both developed and developing—to "undertake and communicate ambitious efforts" 4, creating a universal framework for participation.33

The 5-Year "Ratchet" (Article 4)

While the targets themselves are "bottom-up," the process is legally binding. The Agreement works on a five-year cycle of "increasingly ambitious climate action".2 Under Article 4, each Party is required to prepare, communicate, and maintain successive NDCs every five years.5

The legal linchpin of this entire mechanism is Article 4.3, which states that each Party's successive NDC "will represent a progression" beyond its previous NDC and reflect its "highest possible ambition".5 This legally obligates a "ratchet" of escalating ambition. The system was designed with the explicit understanding that the first round of NDCs (submitted in 2015) was collectively insufficient to meet the 1.5°C goal.32 The second round of NDCs (submitted in 2020-2021) did, in fact, lower projected warming, demonstrating the ratchet in action.32 The third round of NDCs, which will set targets for 2035, is due in 2025.5

The Global Stocktake (GST): The Collective Report Card (Article 14)

The Global Stocktake (GST) is the "accountability engine" 35 that connects the "bottom-up" NDCs with the Agreement's "top-down" 1.5°C/2°C goal.2 Mandated by Article 14, the GST is a process to "periodically take stock" of the Agreement's implementation and assess collective progress—not the progress of individual nations.7 This assessment covers mitigation, adaptation, and climate finance.36

The GST also operates on a five-year cycle.34 The first-ever GST was a two-year process that concluded at COP28 in Dubai in December 2023.7

• First GST Findings: The GST was a "long, hard look at the state of our planet" 7, and its conclusions were stark. The final report affirmed that, despite progress, the world is "not on track" to meet the Agreement's long-term goals.7 The technical summary was even more specific, indicating that for the 1.5°C goal to remain achievable, global emissions must be cut by 43% by 2030 and 60% by 2035.35

• First GST Outcome: The political decision from the GST, known as the "UAE Consensus" 7, was historic. For the first time in 30 years of UN climate negotiations, a formal COP outcome document called on Parties to "transition away from fossil fuels".36

The GST's function is to complete the ambition loop. Its outcome is legally intended to "inform" Parties as they update and enhance their next round of NDCs.2 This creates the full cycle: 1) Countries pledge (NDCs); 2) The world collectively assesses progress (GST); 3) The GST's findings (the "ambition gap") scientifically and politically inform the next, stronger round of pledges. The 2023 GST was the diagnosis (we are failing). The 2025 NDCs are the required response. This 2025 deadline is the first true "moment of truth" for the Agreement's ratchet mechanism.

A Framework of Accountability and Support

The Paris Agreement's architecture is held together by a "grand bargain" struck between developed and developing nations, built upon the twin pillars of accountability (transparency) and support (finance).

The Enhanced Transparency Framework (ETF) (Article 13)

The ETF is the binding "universal framework" 39 for transparency of action and support.8 It is a critical advancement, as it supersedes the previous, bifurcated Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) system under the Convention, which had different rules for developed and developing countries.40

Under the ETF, all Parties are required to submit Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs) to track progress in implementing and achieving their NDCs.39 These BTRs then undergo a "technical expert review" and a "facilitative, multilateral consideration of progress".8 The first BTRs for all Parties are due by December 31, 2024.40 The system is not one-size-fits-all; it includes "built-in flexibility" 8 for those developing countries that "need it in the light of their capacities".8

Climate Finance: The Great Enabler

The ETF was the central concession from developing nations, many of which had long resisted binding, universal transparency rules. The "grand bargain" of Paris was that in exchange for this new accountability, developed nations would provide predictable and scaled-up financial support.2 Transparency is explicitly seen as "key to unlocking climate finance" 39 by providing donors with reliable information on where support is needed and how it is being used.39

• Original Goal (The $100 Billion Goal): This finance commitment predates the Paris Agreement. At COP15 (Copenhagen, 2009) and COP16 (Cancun, 2010), developed countries committed to a collective goal of mobilizing USD 100 billion per year by 2020 to support mitigation and adaptation in developing countries.31 The 2015 Paris Agreement adopted this goal, reaffirmed it, and extended it to 2025.31 The Green Climate Fund (GCF) was established as a "critical element" and key financial mechanism for this purpose.45 This goal was notoriously missed for years, causing significant distrust. OECD analysis confirms the goal was finally, and belatedly, met for the first time in 2022, with $106.8 billion mobilized.47

• New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG): The Paris Agreement (Article 9.4) mandated that Parties set a new collective quantified goal for finance (NCQG) for the post-2025 period, starting from a "floor of USD 100 billion per year".31

• COP29 (Baku) Outcome (2024): Setting this new goal was the central, contentious task of COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan.24 The final "Baku Climate Unity Pact" 48 resulted in a new goal: developed countries are to provide at least $300 billion per year by 2035.24 This outcome was seen as a fragile compromise. Developing nations, who had sought over $1 trillion annually, called the agreement "insulting".24 The UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, stated he "had hoped for a more ambitious outcome" and that the agreement merely "provides a base on which to build".24 This finance pillar, critical to the Agreement's grand bargain, remains under severe strain.

Part II: The US Political Whiplash and its Global Impact

The Paris Agreement's hybrid, resilient architecture has been most severely tested by its most powerful signatory. The "political whiplash" of the United States—swinging from a key architect to a declared obstructionist, then back to a leader, and back to an obstructionist—has defined the Agreement's first decade and created profound instability in the global climate regime.

The First Withdrawal: Process and Justification (2017-2020)

The first US withdrawal was a multi-year, legally constrained process.

• The Announcement: On June 1, 2017, President Donald Trump announced from the White House Rose Garden his "intent to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Accord".10

• The Legal Constraints: The administration could not withdraw immediately. Article 28 of the Paris Agreement stipulates that a Party may not give its notice of withdrawal until three years after the date the Agreement entered into force for that Party.11

• The Legal Timeline: The Agreement entered into force for the US on November 4, 2016.11 Therefore, the Trump administration was legally required to wait three years. On November 4, 2019—the first possible day—the US formally submitted its notification of withdrawal to the United Nations.9

• The Effective Date: Article 28 then requires a one-year waiting period after notification before withdrawal takes effect.9 Consequently, the US withdrawal became legally effective on November 4, 2020, one day after the 2020 US presidential election.10

The administration's 2017 justification was not rooted in climate science denial but in an "America First" economic nationalism.11 The official reason, as stated by the State Department, was the "unfair economic burden imposed on American workers, businesses, and taxpayers by U.S. pledges made under the Agreement".9

In his June 1, 2017, speech, President Trump detailed this rationale 51:

• Economic Cost: He claimed the Agreement would "undermine" the US economy 11 and put the US "at a permanent disadvantage".11 He cited a disputed study by NERA Consulting 52 to claim that compliance would cost the US "close to $3 trillion in lost GDP and 6.5 million industrial jobs" by 2040.51

• Unfairness: He called the deal "very unfair" 51, asserting it "punishes the United States" while imposing "no meaningful obligations on the world’s leading polluters" 51, specifically citing China and India as beneficiaries.51

• Financial Redistribution: He framed the Agreement as a "massive redistribution of United States wealth" 51 and announced the US would "cease all implementation," including ending contributions to the Green Climate Fund (GCF).11

This justification fundamentally misrepresented the Agreement's architecture. The US pledge (the Obama administration's 26-28% emissions reduction target 50) was not a "draconian" burden imposed by the Agreement. It was a bottom-up, "Nationally Determined Contribution" that the United States itself had defined and submitted. The 2017 justification was a political critique of the previous administration's pledge, framed as a legal critique of the treaty.

Table 1: Timeline of US Participation in the Paris Agreement (2015-2026)

Date

Event

Administration

Legal Basis / Citation

Dec 12, 2015

Paris Agreement Adopted at COP21

Obama

[2, 27]

Apr 22, 2016

US Signs the Paris Agreement

Obama

[11, 28]

Sep 3, 2016

US Joins (Accepts) Agreement by Executive Order

Obama

11

Nov 4, 2016

Agreement Enters into Force for the US

Obama

[2, 11, 28]

Jun 1, 2017

President Trump Announces Intent to Withdraw

Trump

[11, 29]

Nov 4, 2019

US Formally Submits Withdrawal Notification (3-year wait)

Trump

9

Nov 4, 2020

US Withdrawal Becomes Legally Effective (1-year wait)

Trump

11

Jan 20, 2021

President Biden Signs Instrument to Rejoin

Biden

[11, 13]

Feb 19, 2021

US Formally Rejoins Agreement (30-day wait)

Biden

[11, 13, 55]

Apr 22, 2021

US Submits new, more ambitious 2030 NDC

Biden

12

Jan 20, 2025

President Trump Signs E.O. Directing Second Withdrawal

Trump

[11, 29]

Jan 2026 (est.)

Second US Withdrawal Becomes Legally Effective (1-year wait)

Trump

[11, 56]

The 2021 Re-entry and Renewed Ambition

The US withdrawal was brief. The 2020 presidential election resulted in a change of administration, and the US was formally out of the Agreement for only 107 days.11

• The Re-entry Process: On January 20, 2021, his first day in office, President Joe Biden signed the executive order to rejoin the Paris Agreement.10 The instrument of acceptance was deposited with the UN that same day.55 Per the Agreement's re-entry rules (a 30-day waiting period), the United States officially became a Party again on February 19, 2021.11

• Renewed Ambition: The re-entry was more than symbolic. On April 22, 2021, at a virtual Leaders Summit on Climate, the Biden administration submitted a new, much more ambitious NDC.12 The new US target was a 50-52 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030.12

This rapid re-entry and ambitious pledge served a dual purpose, consistent with a "two-level game".58 Internationally, it was intended to re-establish US leadership and credibility, signaling to the world that the US was "reengaging... on all fronts".13 Domestically, the ambitious 2030 target provided a "north star" to justify and drive federal climate policy, which culminated in the passage of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, the largest climate investment in US history.12

The Second Withdrawal: A Return to Isolationism (2025-2026)

Following the 2024 presidential election, the US began the withdrawal process for a second time, demonstrating the profound challenge its political system poses to the stability of international climate commitments.

• The 2025 Process: On January 20, 2025, his first day back in office, President Trump signed an executive order titled "Putting America First In International Environmental Agreements".11 This order directed the US Ambassador to the UN to submit formal notification of withdrawal.29

• The Effective Date: The same Article 28 rules apply. The one-year waiting period means the second US withdrawal will become legally effective in January 2026.11

The 2025 rationale for withdrawal marks a significant and dangerous evolution from 2017. While the 2025 executive order still cites "potential economic damage and unfair burdens" 59, the administration's dominant justification has shifted from a transactional, economic critique to a wholesale, ideological rejection of climate action itself.

• The 2025 Rationale:

• President Trump has publicly described climate change as the "greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world".14

• The White House stated it will not "jeopardise our country's economic and national security to pursue vague climate goals".26

• The administration is actively "waging war on renewable energy" while promoting "beautiful, clean coal".21 This is not just rhetoric; the US State Department has closed its climate office and scrapped the post of climate envoy.26

This 2025 withdrawal is far more damaging than the 2017-2020 event. The first withdrawal was transactional—arguing the US signed a "bad deal" that could be renegotiated.52 The 2025 withdrawal is existential—arguing the problem itself is a "hoax" to be rejected. This shift signals the US is not merely an absent partner but an active "spoiler" in global climate diplomacy.61 This is evidenced by the administration's decision to skip COP30 entirely 15 and its use of economic threats to delay climate action at other UN bodies, such as the International Maritime Organization.14 Furthermore, the immediate cessation of all US climate finance contributions makes the newly agreed-upon global climate finance goals "much harder to achieve".21

Table 2: Comparison of US Withdrawal Justifications (2017 vs. 2025)

Justification Category

2017 Rationale (Trump I)

2025 Rationale (Trump II)

Economic Impact

Primary Rationale. Cites "unfair economic burden".9 Specifically quotes NERA study projecting $3T in lost GDP and 6.5M job losses.[51, 52]

Secondary Rationale. E.O. still cites "potential economic damage" 59 but this is overshadowed by ideological claims.

Financial Impact

Framed as "massive redistribution of United States wealth".51 Specifically pledges to cease payments to the Green Climate Fund (GCF).[50, 52]

Ceases all climate finance, directly impacting the new global goal.21 E.O. titled "Putting America First".59

Fairness (vs. Others)

"Very unfair" deal.51 Claims "no meaningful obligations" for China and India, who get a "free pass".51

Less focus on other nations' obligations. Focus is on promoting US "energy dominance" through bilateral "energy partnerships".[14, 26]

Core Premise

Transactional. A "bad deal" that "won't matter much to the climate".51 Suggests willingness to renegotiate a "new transaction".52

Ideological. A "hoax" to be rejected. Climate change is the "greatest con job".14 Goals are "vague" and not worth pursuing.26

Energy Policy

Implicitly, to protect US fossil fuel jobs.[54]

Explicitly, an "all-out assault".[62] Actively "waging war on renewable energy" while promoting "beautiful, clean coal".[21, 26]

The Subnational Counter-Current: "America Is All In"

The Paris Agreement's design, which encourages "whole-of-society" action 16, inadvertently created a powerful backstop against a non-compliant national government. In response to the 2017 withdrawal announcement, a massive subnational movement of US states, cities, businesses, and universities mobilized to "fill the void".10

This movement coalesced into "America Is All In" (which merged the "We Are Still In" and "America's Pledge" initiatives).16

• Who They Are: It is the "most expansive coalition" of non-federal climate leaders in the US.17 Its members include the U.S. Climate Alliance (a bipartisan group of 24 governors) 22, Climate Mayors (nearly 350 mayors) 25, and thousands of businesses, universities, tribal nations, and faith groups.16

• Their Scale: This coalition is not marginal. It represents a "two-thirds of the US population and three quarters of the US GDP" 65, or approximately 60% of the U.S. economy and 55% of the U.S. population.16

• Their Goal: The coalition's explicit goal is to "continue to support climate action to meet the Paris Agreement".16 They remain committed to the US NDC target of cutting emissions in half by 2030 and reaching net-zero by 2050, regardless of federal policy.16

With the 2025 federal withdrawal, this coalition has again stepped into the breach. As the Trump administration has announced it will not send any high-level representatives to the crucial COP30 summit in Belem, Brazil 14, "America Is All In" is acting as a "shadow" US delegation.

The coalition is sending a delegation of more than 100 leaders to Brazil for COP30, including state governors, mayors, and members of Congress.25 This delegation will run the "America Is All In Pavillion" at the summit.25 Their message is to "reinforce their commitment to the Paris Agreement's goals" 25 and show the world that "subnational American jurisdictions are still pressing ahead with climate action".61 This subnational presence provides a fragmented but crucial anchor of stability, preventing a total collapse of US climate action and demonstrating to the world that the US economic core is "still in".63

Part III: The Agreement in 2025: Resilience in a Fractured Landscape

Global Reactions to US Volatility

The international reaction to the two US withdrawals demonstrates the Agreement's resilience but also its vulnerability.

• 2017 Reaction: Galvanization: The 2017 announcement "galvanized" the rest of the world.18 Instead of creating a "domino effect" 53, it triggered a strong wave of political support for the Agreement. Other major powers—including the G-7, the European Union, and China—issued strong joint statements "strongly reaffirm[ing] their commitment" to the Agreement and its goals.10 The Agreement's legal and political framework held firm.

• 2025 Reaction: Resignation and Damage Control: The reaction to the 2025 withdrawal has been one of weary resignation. The international community now largely views the US as a "chronically unreliable climate partner".20 The prevailing sentiment, as articulated by UN Climate Secretary Simon Stiell, is that the world "may step back, but others are already stepping into their place" and the global effort must "move on".19

However, the impact of the 2025 withdrawal is more severe. The US is not just absent; it is acting as a "spoiler".61 Its withdrawal creates a massive, immediate hole in the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for finance 21 and has "embolden[ed] other nations to follow suit" or, at a minimum, to weaken their own climate commitments.22

The Road to COP30 (Belem, 2025): An Agreement Under Pressure

The upcoming COP30 summit in Belem, Brazil (November 2025) 69, is a critical turning point for the Agreement, where the consequences of US volatility and the global "ambition gap" will collide.

The high-stakes agenda for COP30 includes:

1. Receiving New NDCs: This is the 2025 deadline for the crucial third round of NDCs. These NDCs, setting 2035 targets, are the world's formal response to the 2023 Global Stocktake's findings.5

2. The Finance Roadmap: Operationalizing the "Baku-to-Belem Roadmap" to scale global climate finance toward the $1.3 trillion annual need identified by analysts, building on the $300B NCQG.21

3. Thematic Priorities: The Brazilian presidency is centering the agenda on forest protection, climate justice, adaptation, and finance.71

However, the Agreement heads into COP30 facing a severe "ambition gap." The 2023 GST confirmed the world is "not on track" for 1.5°C 23 and needs a 60% global emissions cut by 2035.35 The 2025 NDCs are the mechanism to deliver that.

As of late October 2025, the response has been dire. A UN stocktaking report revealed that only 64 countries (representing just 30% of global emissions) had submitted their new NDCs.21 The UN analysis of these new pledges found them to be "woefully inadequate".21 They would lead to only a 10% fall in emissions by 2035, a fraction of the 60% required.21 In response to this gap, the UN Secretary-General has stated that it is now "inevitable" the 1.5°C threshold will be breached, at least temporarily.21

This global failure to respond to the GST is where the impact of the US withdrawal becomes most clear. The world's second-largest emitter 1 and largest economy has not only failed to submit an ambitious 2035 NDC; it has withdrawn from the Agreement entirely.73 This US action provides "political cover" for other major emitters—like China and the EU, who have also been slow to submit their 2035 NDCs 73—to weaken their own targets, arguing they cannot and should not bear the economic burden alone.22 The US withdrawal, therefore, threatens to stall the Agreement's central "ratchet mechanism," turning a process designed for escalating ambition into one of global stagnation.

Report Conclusion: The Paris Agreement's Endurability Beyond Singular Parties

The Paris Agreement's innovative architecture—defined by its hybrid "bottom-up" national pledges 6 and its inclusion of "whole-of-society" non-state actors 17—has proven remarkably durable. It was designed to bend, not break, under political pressure. The Agreement's legal framework survived the first US withdrawal 18 and will, as a legal entity, survive the second.19

However, the effectiveness of the Paris Agreement is not defined by its legal survival. It is defined by its ability to drive collective ambition 6 at a scale sufficient to meet the 1.5°C temperature goal.4

Viewed through this lens, the "whiplash" of US policy has been devastating. The oscillation from architect (2015), to obstructionist (2017), to leader (2021), and back to "spoiler" (2025) has created a profound "reliability crisis".20 It has critically undermined the "transparency-finance bargain" that holds the Agreement together 39 and provided a powerful political excuse for global inaction.21

As of 2025, the Agreement's framework is holding. Its goal, however, is slipping away. The "woefully inadequate" NDCs submitted ahead of COP30 21 demonstrate a collective failure of political will. This failure is catalyzed in large part by the profound and recurring volatility of the Agreement's most powerful, and most unreliable, Party.

Works cited

1. Paris Agreement - Wikipedia, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement

2. The Paris Agreement | United Nations, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/paris-agreement

3. accessed on November 2, 2025, https://climateactiontracker.org/methodology/paris-temperature-goal/#:~:text=The%20central%20objective%20of%20the,above%20pre%2Dindustrial%20levels%E2%80%9D.

4. Paris Agreement text English - UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf

5. All About the NDCs | United Nations - UN.org., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/all-about-ndcs

6. Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) - UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs

7. Global Stocktake - UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/topics/global-stocktake

8. Transparency of support under the Paris Agreement - UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/topics/climate-finance/workstreams/transparency-of-support-ex-post/transparency-of-support-under-the-paris-agreement

9. On the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement - United States ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://2017-2021.state.gov/on-the-u-s-withdrawal-from-the-paris-agreement/

10. Paris Climate Agreement Q&A, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.c2es.org/content/paris-climate-agreement-qa/

11. United States and the Paris Agreement - Wikipedia, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Paris_Agreement

12. Paris Climate Agreement – Environmental and Energy Law Program, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/tracker/paris-climate-agreement/

13. The United States Officially Rejoins the Paris Agreement - United ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://2021-2025.state.gov/the-united-states-officially-rejoins-the-paris-agreement/

14. Why the US won't send top officials to COP30 climate summit in ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://indianexpress.com/article/world/why-the-us-wont-send-top-officials-to-cop30-climate-summit-in-brazil-10338941/

15. COP30: US not sending any high-level officials — White House, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/cop30-us-not-sending-any-high-level-officials-white-house/articleshow/125031902.cms

16. About - America Is All In, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.americaisallin.com/about

17. accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.americaisallin.com/about#:~:text=AMERICA%20IS%20ALL%20IN%20is,faith%2C%20health%2C%20and%20culture.

18. The galvanized world response to Trump's Paris Agreement decision, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-galvanized-world-response-to-trumps-paris-agreement-decision/

19. Countries remain committed to Paris Agreement despite US exit | World Economic Forum, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/02/paris-agreement-us-exit-nature-climate-stories/

20. The U.S. Has Exited the Paris Agreement. Does it Matter?, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.iisd.org/articles/insight/us-has-exited-paris-agreement-does-it-matter

21. What can COP30 achieve, following US withdrawal and ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/10/what-can-cop30-achieve-following-us-withdrawal-and-underwhelming-climate-plans

22. The Trump Administration's Retreat From Global Climate Leadership, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-trump-administrations-retreat-from-global-climate-leadership/

23. Why the Global Stocktake is Important for Climate Action this Decade - UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/topics/global-stocktake/about-the-global-stocktake/why-the-global-stocktake-is-important-for-climate-action-this-decade

24. COP29: Investing in a livable planet for all | United Nations - UN.org., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/cop29

25. Today, America Is All In, Climate Mayors, and the U.S. Climate ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://usclimatealliance.org/press-releases/alliance-all-in-climate-mayors-cop30-local-leaders-forum-delegation-oct-2025/

26. COP30 snub: US to skip top-level presence in Brazil; Donald Trump ‘directly engaging’ with leaders on energy issues, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/cop30-snub-us-to-skip-top-level-presence-in-brazil-donald-trump-directly-engaging-with-leaders-on-energy-issues/articleshow/125017542.cms

27. The Paris Agreement | UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/parisagreement_publication.pdf

28. 7. d Paris Agreement - UNTC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://treaties.un.org/pages/viewdetails.aspx?src=treaty&mtdsg_no=xxvii-7-d&chapter=27&clang=_en

29. U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Process and Potential Effects | Congress.gov, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48504

30. Paris temperature goal - Climate Action Tracker, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://climateactiontracker.org/methodology/paris-temperature-goal/

31. Introduction to Climate Finance | UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/topics/introduction-to-climate-finance

32. What are NDCs and how do they drive climate action? | UNDP Climate Promise, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/NDCs-nationally-determined-contributions-climate-change-what-you-need-to-know

33. What Are NDCs and How Do They Address Climate Change? | World Resources Institute, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.wri.org/insights/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs-explained

34. accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/topics/global-stocktake/about-the-global-stocktake/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-global-stocktake#:~:text=The%20stocktake%20takes%20place%20every,be%20put%20forward%20by%202025.

35. The First Global Stocktake | Briefing | EESI - Environmental and Energy Study Institute, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.eesi.org/briefings/view/112723cop

36. What Is the "Global Stocktake" and Why Is It Important? | World ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.wri.org/insights/explaining-global-stocktake-paris-agreement

37. Frequently Asked Questions About the Global Stocktake | UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/topics/global-stocktake/about-the-global-stocktake/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-global-stocktake

38. What is the global stocktake? - McKinsey, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-is-the-global-stocktake

39. Transparency | Climate Promise - United Nations Development Programme, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://climatepromise.undp.org/what-we-do/areas-of-work/transparency

40. Preparing for the Enhanced Transparency Framework | UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/transparency-and-reporting/preparing-for-the-ETF

41. Finance & Justice | United Nations, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/raising-ambition/climate-finance

42. From Billions to Trillions: Setting a New Goal on Climate Finance | UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/news/from-billions-to-trillions-setting-a-new-goal-on-climate-finance

43. Climate Finance and the USD 100 billion goal - OECD, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/climate-finance-and-the-usd-100-billion-goal.html

44. Climate Finance and the USD 100 billion goal - OECD, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/climate-finance-and-the-usd-100-billion-goal.html

45. Resource Mobilisation - Green Climate Fund, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.greenclimate.fund/about/resource-mobilisation

46. About GCF - Green Climate Fund, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.greenclimate.fund/about

47. $100 Billion of Climate Finance Provided: Fact or Fiction? | Center For Global Development, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.cgdev.org/blog/100-billion-climate-finance-provided-fact-or-fiction

48. Key COP29 outcomes - Woodwell Climate, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.woodwellclimate.org/key-cop29-outcomes/

49. COP29 UN Climate Conference Agrees to Triple Finance to Developing Countries, Protecting Lives and Livelihoods | UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/news/cop29-un-climate-conference-agrees-to-triple-finance-to-developing-countries-protecting-lives-and

50. President Trump Announces Withdrawal From Paris Agreement, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/president-trump-announces-withdrawal-paris-agreement-0

51. Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord – The ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord/

52. President Trump Announces U.S. Withdrawal From the Paris Climate Accord, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/articles/president-trump-announces-u-s-withdrawal-paris-climate-accord/

53. An analysis of the Trump Administration's economic and policy arguments for withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement on climate change - LSE, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/an-analysis-of-the-trump-administrations-economic-and-policy-arguments-for-withdrawal-of-the-united-states-from-the-paris-agreement-on-climate-change/

54. The Consequences of Leaving the Paris Agreement - Council on Foreign Relations, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/consequences-leaving-paris-agreement

55. UN Welcomes US Announcement to Rejoin Paris Agreement - UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/news/un-welcomes-us-announcement-to-rejoin-paris-agreement

56. Five things to know about the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris ..., accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.woodwellclimate.org/us-withdrawal-paris-agreement/

57. The U.S. Is Back in the Paris Agreement. Now What? - State of the Planet, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/02/04/u-s-rejoins-paris-agreement/

58. The U.S. Rejoins the Paris Agreement: Symbolism or Success? | ACS, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.acslaw.org/expertforum/the-u-s-rejoins-the-paris-agreement-symbolism-or-success/

59. US Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Impact and Next Steps | White & Case LLP, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/us-withdrawal-paris-agreement-impact-and-next-steps

60. Trump’s blithe dismissal of climate science, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/29/trump-climate-crisis-denial

61. No high-level US representatives will go to UN climate talks, Trump officials say, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/31/cop30-climate-us-officials

62. Ex-EPA head urges US to resist Trump attacks on climate action: ‘We won’t become numb’, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/30/resist-trump-attacks-climate-action

63. We Are Still In: Home, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.wearestillin.com/

64. COP30 - America Is All In, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.americaisallin.com/cop30

65. 100 US local leaders will attend COP30 in 'show of force', accessed on November 2, 2025, https://sg.news.yahoo.com/100-us-local-leaders-attend-004706428.html

66. U.S. Climate Alliance, America Is All In, and Climate Mayors on Future of Climate Action Under Trump: “We Will Not Waver…We Will Not Turn Back”, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://usclimatealliance.org/press-releases/alliance-all-in-climate-mayors-election-joint-statement-nov-2024/

67. Subnational Leaders Bring U.S. Climate Ambition to the Global Stage, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.americaisallin.com/subnational-leaders-bring-us-climate-ambition-global-stage

68. COP30 Events Listing - We Mean Business Coalition, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.wemeanbusinesscoalition.org/cop-business-pavilion/cop30-events-listing/

69. The road to Belém - UNFCCC, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/conferences/un-climate-change-conference-belem-november-2025/the-road-to-belem

70. Action Agenda - COP 30, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://cop30.br/en/action-agenda

71. COP30: Your Guide to the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference - The Nature Conservancy, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-priorities/tackle-climate-change/climate-change-stories/cop-climate-change-conference/

72. 10 Key Themes Shaping Brazil's COP30 Agenda in Belém - Forests News, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://forestsnews.cifor.org/93254/brazil-cop30-agenda-key-themes?fnl=

73. World’s climate plans fall drastically short of action needed, analysis shows, accessed on November 2, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/28/worlds-climate-plans-fall-drastically-short-of-action-needed-analysis-shows