U.S. to Exit Foundational UN Climate Pact in Sweeping Trump-Led Withdrawal

The Trump administration is pulling the United States out of the United Nations’ foundational climate treaty, a move that has drawn fierce criticism from scientists and international organizations who are calling it a “new low” for American foreign policy.

A presidential memorandum signed on January 7, 2026, formalizes the withdrawal from more than 60 international organizations, treaties, and conventions. The document states that U.S. participation in these bodies is “contrary to the interests of the country.”

Many of the organizations on the list focus on climate change, migration, and labor. The decision comes as the White House moves to increase fossil fuel production and delay clean energy projects. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) removed all mentions of fossil fuels from an informational website about the causes of climate change.

The most significant departure is from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which was adopted in 1992 by nearly 200 countries. The treaty is considered the cornerstone of international climate cooperation and was the precursor to the 2015 Paris Agreement, from which the U.S. has already withdrawn.

The UNFCCC’s primary goal is to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations at levels that would prevent dangerous interference with the climate system. It also establishes that developed nations should take the lead, providing financial support to developing countries for adaptation measures beyond existing aid.

The Trump administration has previously severed ties with bodies such as the UN Human Rights Council and UNESCO. The new list of 66 organizations includes the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s leading authority on climate science.

The IPCC provides scientific data that governments use to shape policy, and its reports are a key tool in international negotiations. Experts warn that the U.S. withdrawal could weaken the scientific bulwarks against misinformation and unsound policy choices. Also on the list are UN-Oceans, the International Renewable Energy Agency, and various biodiversity protection initiatives.

The decision has triggered a wave of condemnation. Rachel Cleetus of the Union of Concerned Scientists called the withdrawal from the UN climate treaty a “new low,” describing it as a slide into anti-scientific and authoritarian practices at the expense of citizens’ well-being.

David Waskow, a director at the World Resources Institute, called the move a “strategic blunder” that strips the U.S. of any advantage. He said the withdrawal not only isolates the country but removes it entirely from the field of international climate policy, just as other economies are investing heavily in clean energy and creating new jobs.

According to 2023 data, 1.6 million workers were employed in the renewable energy sector in the European Union, a figure expected to rise as solar and wind power increasingly dominate electricity generation.

UNFCCC Executive Secretary Simon Stiell told Euronews Green that “the door remains open” for the U.S. to return in the future. He warned that disengaging from international cooperation would harm the American economy, jobs, and standard of living as natural disasters intensify and energy and insurance costs rise.

Stiell added that the decision would lead to job losses in U.S. industry as other major economies accelerate their investments in clean energy. He stressed that international cooperation remains the only path to address global warming and its impacts on economies and societies.