The world is concerned about the fate of the various important international agreements on climate change under the US President-elect Donald Trump, even as it forges ahead by taking global and domestic action to slow down the rate of carbon emissions. Scientists firmly believe that the threat of climate change is real and human activities are responsible for it. This thought has leapfrogged from the UNFCCC COP21 summit in Paris (November 2015) to this year’s COP22 in the Ochre City of Marrakech, Morocco.

We know that the US and other developed countries have been deeply involved in finalising all international treaties on climate change. Let us have a look at some of these agreements to appreciate the magnitude of challenge cancelling these will pose, if Trump decides to turn the clock on such agreements.

The Paris agreement was ratified by 63 countries, including the US, which currently emits about 55% of the global emissions. In Marrakech, the International Solar Alliance (ISA)—an initiative of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi—has been ratified to bring all sunshine-rich nations between the tropics on a common platform with regard to policies, programmes/projects, capacity-building measures and financial instruments to increase solar energy capacity. In addition, a group of 48 small and poorest island nations have committed to zero carbon societies by 2050.

In October, Montreal Protocol, ratified by 191 countries, was convened in Kigali, Rwanda, to discuss the replacement of substances that deplete the ozone layer. Here, developed countries were asked to take the lead to phase out hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) by inventing technologies which should be available to developing countries at an affordable price. Many countries, including India, are working on patent-free solutions searching for alternatives to HFCs.

This year itself, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, at its 39th conference, discussed measures for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Also, the International Maritime Organisation impressed upon governments to ratify the London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, so that dumping in the seas could be stopped/regulated to mitigate maritime environmental pollution. Besides, there have been some international treaties to combat climate change in the earlier years.

In all the above treaties, the US has been the key player in shaping the conversation on climate change. In the recent past, America’s active engagement with China, India and small island nations has helped fashion global agreements. How all this would change under President Trump is a question. If the President-elect pulls out of the Paris agreement, the Barack Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, under the US National Climate Action Plan, may not be adhered to and may, consequently, derail the efforts to speed up the production of renewable energy. History may repeat itself, as had happened with Kyoto Protocol in 1997, where the US did not ratify the protocol following a change of guard in Washington, even though it was instrumental in getting it through. Moreover, with America withdrawing, some other rich nations may follow suit.

In the above, rather grim scenario, it would be extremely difficult to limit the average global temperature rise well below 2-degree Celsius by 2100 from the pre-Industrial Revolution period, as decided in Paris. Moreover, the US is required to add to its current abysmally low emission target, otherwise the world may face even a 4-degree Celsius rise. The world needs a 0.9% reduction in emission level every year till 2030 at least to achieve the target of below 2-degree. Also, the decision made at the recent COP22 for finalisation of the rule book, which would turn pledges made in Paris into action, would be jeopardised. The issue of providing $100 billion to developing countries, though still unresolved, would receive further setback.

The world is suffering from extreme climate conditions of floods, drought and storms/hurricanes, etc, and even the US is not immune to this. That is why Washington-based think tank World Resources Institute is in favour of strong action to tackle climate change. In addition, the 45 US companies, including largest retailer Walmart, have committed to ambitious emission reduction targets. Further, due to global warming, some parts of the Arctic are experiencing a jump of 20-degree Celsius above normal temperatures. This is akin to having 50-degree Celsius in November, and about 65-degree Celsius in June, in Delhi. This new phenomenon may disrupt monsoon activity over some parts of the world, drastically affecting humans by causing various disease outbreaks and threatening food security due to inconsistent crop yields. In fact, this has already started happening.

In the wake of this crisis, it is important to determine whether the US President-elect has changed his views on climate change which he described as a ‘Chinese hoax’ during his election campaign.

There is no real trade-off between climate change and economic interests of the US and other rich nations. If we want robust inclusive growth, we must act on climate change. Trumping climate change would simply be disastrous.

The author is a former ISS officer and a former UN consultant