Abstract
President Donal Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Agreement, and stated that the withdrawal was mainly to protect its national interests. The U.S. economic ambitions, the China factor and the intricacies of U.S domestic politics had played a major role in deciding the U.S. position on the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. There are some who are sceptical on whether the Paris Agreement would successfully achieve its expected outcomes in the absence of U.S. participation. The objective of this study is to examine the factors that have discouraged the U.S. to partake in the international climate change agreements. An analytical framework was employed for this study that examines the insights and conceptions from the textual data, based on realism. The study concludes that the U.S. outlook on climate change had more or less adhered to the realist stance, even though realism is considered a theoretical approach with significant drawbacks, particularly when dealing with issues of climate change. Nonetheless, this study also asserts that there is a need for deeper engagement between the U.S. and the participants of the Paris Agreement to effectively tackle the issues of climate change at this moment.
Highlights
The threat perceptions that drive the behavior of nation-states in the international system vary in different periods
The traditional realist paradigm had failed to acknowledge the climate change problem, the dangers that climate change poses for the international community has forced realists to seriously address this issue
Since the U.S interests on climate change was mainly driven by the economic factors and its domestic politics, it is less likely that there would be any changes to the current U.S stance on climate change in the immediate future
Summary
The threat perceptions that drive the behavior of nation-states in the international system vary in different periods. Anu Unny the immediate action from all countries Climate change is such a non-traditional security threat that has been widely discussed in many international forums since the 1970s. On the other hand, developed countries that have historically been proven to bear the responsibility for causing this problem are finding alternative approaches to mitigate the effects of climate change. This has created a political void in the international system, making it difficult for a consensus to be reached between the developed and developing states. Though realism has many variants, defensive and offensive realist positions have been utilized for this study through the qualitative method to understand the U.S position on international climate agreements.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
