The Post-American Climate Order: Power, Policy, And The Vacuum Ahead – OpEd

March 30, 2026
By Anchal Mathur


Recently, US President Donald Trump threw yet another bombshell by revoking the ‘Endangerment Finding’ clause under the Clean Air Act 2002, that can further cripple America’s environmental protection. The ‘endangerment finding’ was drafted by America’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2009. In 2007, in Massachusetts vs. EPA case, the federal court ordered EPA to confirm if greenhouse gases (GHG), that warm the Earth, are also pollutants that can potentially harm public health. It was in response to Federal court’s direction that the EPA issued this finding claiming that six GHGs- carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulphur hexafluoride in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. This endangerment finding was included in America’s Clean Air Act, giving legal authority to the federal government to curb carbon emissions especially from vehicular sector and fossil-fuel based power plants.

However, unlike his recent measures that came as a shock to the world, this move is not out of the blue. President Trump has been one of the most vocal critics of climate change, denying its existence altogether. His climate scepticism stems from the fear of losing revenue and markets for the oil industry as well as the automobile sector. Trump justifies his move by arguing that this clause had put greater burden on the automobile companies to raise their anti-pollution standards, raising the cost of vehicles and burdening the consumers with higher prices. Clearly his climate scepticism is nothing but a mercantilist attitude prioritising profits over the planet.

This move has been hailed by his MAGA crowd in anticipation of lower vehicular prices. In the short term, such moves can help garner public support. But in the long run, denial of climate realities can cost a bomb. America, in recent times, has seen one of the worst disasters, unprecedented in scale. There is ample scientific evidence proving that climate change has the potential to derail developmental progress, development that the Trump regime is working hard for. Data from National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) shows that frequency and cost of disasters have increased in the USA over the last century. In 2024 alone, USA witnessed 27 climate disaster events with losses amounting to $1 billion.

Moreover, disasters in his own constituencies like Pennsylvania’s flash floods and North Carolina’s hurricane helene are a grim reminder of worsening of the crisis waiting for acknowledgement. In fact, as per The U.S. Climate Vulnerability Index, states such as Kentucky and South Carolina are some of the most vulnerable states which have shockingly been Trump loyalists in each of his three campaigns. However, the Trump regime has been audacious enough to leave his own support base in peril. He has called for repealing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that looks after hazard and disaster management in the USA, even though 50% of FEMA funding from 2015 to 2024 went to states that voted for Trump in 2024 [3].

In face of dwindling support from America for the climate cause, the world should now prepare itself for a post-American climate order. Such a system shall be less dependent on America for climate action. Instead, it must be led by serious actors like India. India’s curation of the International Solar Alliance (ISA) can be seen as an effort to move away from America-led environmental institutions. Further, climate multilateralism needs to be more issue-specific rather than generic, making climate action precise, targeted and effective. The climate crisis is multifaceted and so are its solutions. With generic framework and overarching goals, little can be achieved. The world must identify the priority areas and create separate institutional structure for each. For instance, India launched the Global Biofuel Alliance (GBA) in 2023 to decarbonise the transportation sector by popularising use of alternate cleaner fuels and given that the transportation sector contributes a massive 14% of annual GHG emissions, this initiative can indeed be a way towards greener mobility.

One relatively reassuring aspect about America’s climate politics is that Trump will not remain in office indefinitely, leaving room for hope that new leadership can recalibrate the country’s climate foreign policy. However, the concern is that America’s foreign climate posture has often dwindled, failing to exhibit sincerity in dealing with climate challenges. Even during the Kyoto negotiations, the US remained reluctant to commit to binding targets and accept the responsibility of having caused climate change in the first place. It did not ratify the protocol and insisted on binding promises from India and China like countries that were neither responsible for the cause nor had the capacity to commit to emissions reduction, given the need for development and poverty alleviation. Such hypocritical behaviour has remained almost consistent in America’s foreign climate policy.

The subnational governments such as California, on the contrary, are working earnestly to follow a low-carbon economic model and minimize the country’s reputational damage due to federal inaction. However, subnational diplomacy has its limitations. Despite best efforts, they cannot represent their nations as federal governments can. And therefore, the world should prepare for a new climate order that is less dependent on America for climate resources, where partnering with America is a choice and not compulsion and where promises translate into action


Anchal Mathur

Anchal Mathur is a doctoral candidate at the Jindal School of International Affairs, with research interests centred on climate diplomacy and international climate governance. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations, Security and Strategy from JSIA.