Memorandum Towards Paris Climate Agreement


Memorandum on U.S. Foreign Policy Towards Paris Climate Agreement

TO: President Trump

CC: Mark Shirk

FROM: Foreign Analyst Rachael Feldhausen

DATE: April 27th, 2018

SUBJECT: Foreign Policy Regarding Paris Climate Agreement

Scientists have predicted that within the next century the core temperature of the earth will increase by more than 2 degrees celsius given the current rate of greenhouse gas emissions and other forms of pollution. If this temper change occurs, the globe will see drastic changes and effects. These changes include a sea level rise of over a foot and a half which would ruin coastal cities and towns, less fresh water, the destruction of 99% of the coral reefs which would ruin the ecosystem of roughly 9 million different species, and more. As the globe continued to warm, the worse these effects will become, more people’s lives will be destroyed, and trillions of dollars will be spent. In 2015, 195 countries, including the U.S., met to discuss and combat the dangers of climate change. However, President Trump has made talks of leaving it. It is my suggestion that the United States should remain in the Paris Climate Agreement.

BACKGROUND

The goal of the Paris Climate Agreement was to reduce global emissions and prevent the earth’s core from heating more than 1.5 degrees celsius. Every 5 years, each country who signed on to the deal would reconvene and make new pledges, with the hope that the pledges would increase every time. Under President Obama, the United States pledged to lower greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28%. The U.S. also pledged 3 billion dollars to give to developing countries to aid them in reducing their emissions without crippling their economies.

TASK

The United States is one of the World’s largest producers of greenhouse gas emissions in the world. It should therefore be the goal of the United States to work diligently to lower its greenhouse gas emissions and aid in the global efforts of ending climate change. If the United States does not make any efforts to lower its emissions, the earth will continue to warm, and the consequences would be extremely harmful to U.S. interests and the U.S. economy. 
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

Solution 1: It is currently the position of President Trump to pull out the Paris Climate Agreement without any intention to make an effort to decrease greenhouse gas emissions. In other words one possible solution is to reject the idea that climate change exists and do nothing to stop it. Given the vast amount of scientific research that proves that climate change is not just occurring, but also poses a huge threat to the United States, choosing to ignore climate change is not a viable solution.

Solution 2: Some Americans and American politicians would like to see the U.S. pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement whilst continuing in efforts to reduce emissions. They view the Paris Agreement as an infringement on the sovereignty of the  U.S., and believe that we should go at climate change alone. However, if we were to pull out of the Agreement, we would be setting a precedent for other countries to withdraw from the deal. Even if the United States were to decrease emissions by 100%, it would still not be enough to reduce the earth’s core’s rising temperatures. This needs to be a global effort. We would also potentially be allowing China to be the global leader on the issue of climate change and reducing our power as a global leader. In addition, the agreement is non binding and based on a pledge that we volunteered to submit. Therefore it has no infringement on our sovereignty. 

Solution 3: Remaining in the Paris Climate Agreement and continuing to abide by the promise that we agreed to.

IMPLEMENTATION

The United States should continue to remain in the Paris Climate Agreement. In order to fulfill the pledge that we made the government should first and foremost give the money that it pledged to donate. Then it should impose rules regarding how much emissions factories, automobiles, and other forms of machinery are allowed to emit. The United States should work towards researching, developing, and implementing alternative forms of energy. Public forms of transportation should be improved so as to incentivize more people to use other forms of transportation.

Overall, these steps are the best way to work towards a global effort to reduce the core temperature of the earth. It is imperative that we start to implement these goals as soon as possible. The longer we wait, the harder it will be to combat climate change, and eventually it will be too late to prevent the inevitable. If something is to be done, now is the time. If we do not act now it may be too late.

Comments

  1. UnknownMay 1, 2018 at 1:15 PM

    I really enjoyed reading your memo and it was very insightful, Rachael! I completely agree with your argument that it is most beneficial and in the best interest of the United States to remain in the Paris Climate Agreement. I also agree that the United States has the responsibility to fulfill its initial pledge to comply to the Paris Climate Agreement’s rules when entering the agreement. Combating climate change is a global effort and without the complete assistance of the United States, the world will be more at risk of the effects of climate change. Do you think that a fourth possible option for the U.S. could be to remain in the agreement but propose modifications to the deal, such as decreasing the amount of financial aid that must be supplied to developing nations?

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownMay 2, 2018 at 12:51 PM

    Thank you so much for your feedback! I dont know about the intricacies of the deal. However, it was my impression that each country volunteered to the pledges that they chose for themselves. Therefore I am not sure that there has to be proposed modifications or if the United States can just make a new pledge in 5 years when the pledges are renewed. I think that this is something that would be proposed in Congress, not within the deal itself.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownMay 6, 2018 at 7:30 PM

    Reading your memorandum was very interesting. I 100 percent agree with your conclusion to stay in the deal. Climate change is not just a problem faced by a region or an individual country. Every single person is effected by climate change so this must be a global effort. The Paris Climate Agreement is the only agreement in which the overwhelming majority of countries have agreed to sign onto it. Pulling out of the agreement would be a huge mistake because U.S. support adds credibility to the agreement. The U.S. has been the world leader of climate change initiatives so we should still keep our position. The world is leaning towards green energy and by pulling out of the deal and not attempting to go green would make us lag behind the rest of the world.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

U.S Foreign Policy towards Middle East

After World War II, the overriding concern of American foreign policy was finding a new way to check Soviet expansion and influence throughout the world. The Middle East, specifically, was a vulnerable target for the U.S. and Soviet Union after British and French colonialism. That said, US foreign policy towards the Middle East was not completely linear during the past century. Instead, it can be divided into two periods — during the Cold War and after the Cold War. During the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy was mostly a reaction to Soviet strength, position, and action. [1] After the Cold War, the Middle East — being considered as part of the Third World, was to be “exploited” for the needs of the industrial societies and to “fulfill its major function as a source of raw materials and a market.”[2] In other words, peace and oil have been the main focus of US foreign policy in the Middle East after the Cold War.  During the Cold War, the Soviet goal was to achieve strategic pari...
Read more

Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement

TO: President Donald Trump FROM: Matt Fitzgerald DATE: April 29, 2018 SUBJECT: Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement Introduction Climate change has been increasingly affecting Earth ever since the industrial revolution. Earth has been becoming warmer every month. Sea levels have been rising, and coastlines have been disappearing. Something needs to be done so that the effects of climate change do not become permanent. There have been many failed global attempts to decrease our carbon emissions, and many countries including the three largest polluters, the U.S., China, and India are reluctant to do so. Only one attempt looks promising to help start the trend towards using green energy. The Paris Accords might not be perfect, but it is a good start to the world using green energy. Option 1 Pulling out of the Accords will be a reckless long-term decision. The U.S. needs to be the leader of the free world. The U.S. is the largest polluter in terms of population. W...
Read more

Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea

Memorandum Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea To: President Donald Trump CC: Professor Shirk From: Foreign Policy Analyst, Victoria Hassan Subject: The North Korean Nuclear Arsenal Dilemma Issue: If not already, North Korea is very close to achieving nuclear armed international ballistic missile capability that is capable of reaching the United States and other regions of North America. Even to experts, North Korea’s motive and intentions for building up a nuclear arsenal have been quite unclear and unpredictable. Recently, there has been much debate as to whether or not the United States should take military action regarding North Korea’s reluctance to denuclearize the entire Korean Peninsula. However, U.S. military action and complete U.S.  inaction are not the only options for dealing with North Korea. Option 1: Trump-Kim Summit Peaceful Negotiations Avoiding military action and possibly the use of nuclear weapons agai...
Read more