On September 24, 2025, as world leaders gathered under the grand dome of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, a glaring absence spoke louder than any speech: the United States, once a linchpin of global climate diplomacy, was nowhere to be found. Instead, 121 countries—including China, Russia, Japan, Germany, and an array of small island and developing nations—stood together to pledge accelerated cuts to greenhouse gas emissions over the next decade. The message was unmistakable: the world is moving forward on climate action, with or without U.S. leadership.
The summit’s opening remarks from U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres set the tone for the day. "We are the dawn of a new energy era," he declared, signaling a sense of urgency and optimism. The world’s poorest countries, from Chad to the Central African Republic, joined wealthy and emerging economies alike to underscore the universal stakes of the climate crisis. Even oil-rich nations such as Saudi Arabia, typically associated with fossil fuel exports, are now racing to build solar capacity, reflecting a tectonic shift in global energy priorities. According to The New York Times, this united front was a powerful display of international resolve—one that left the United States diplomatically isolated on an issue with consequences for every corner of the planet.
The U.S. absence was not accidental. President Donald Trump’s administration has made no secret of its hostility toward renewable energy. From the very start of his presidency, Trump rolled back incentives for building solar and wind projects, slashed support for electric vehicles, and fast-tracked permits for coal mines and natural gas terminals. At the General Assembly just a day prior to the summit, Trump derided the global transition to clean energy as a "green scam," warning world leaders, "If you don’t get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail." He urged European and Asian countries to buy more American fossil fuels, doubling down on oil and gas exports as the U.S. strategy for prosperity.
This stance has left the United States at odds with nearly every other major economy. While the Trump administration’s rhetoric paints a picture of economic doom tied to renewables, economists, researchers, and political leaders worldwide have largely dismissed these claims. In fact, as many countries pointed out at the summit, renewables are now often cheaper than fossil fuels, making them not just an environmental imperative but an economic one as well.
Philip Davis, prime minister of the Bahamas, captured this sentiment at a pre-summit event. "We need decision makers everywhere to understand that replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy will not come at the expense of prosperity, but is a prerequisite for future prosperity," he said. The message was clear: the energy transition is not a threat, but a path to economic resilience and growth—a view increasingly shared by leaders across the globe.
China, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases due to its heavy reliance on coal, made the summit’s most consequential announcement. President Xi Jinping, addressing the assembly by video link, pledged that by 2035 China would reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 7% to 10% from peak levels, a milestone it is expected to reach this year. He also committed to raising China’s share of non-fossil fuels to more than 30% and to sextuple the country’s installed wind and solar power capacity by then. Without directly naming the United States, Xi referenced those "acting against" the transition to low-emissions fuels, urging the international community to "stay focused on the right direction."
China’s targets, while ambitious in scale, are described by analysts as conservative in terms of policy support. According to Impakter, the country’s renewable energy and electric vehicle goals—such as 3,600 GW of wind and solar capacity and making EVs mainstream—are achievable without significant new incentives. Instead, China is letting market forces drive clean-tech growth, a move that may slow the pace of innovation but still signals a long-term commitment to decarbonization.
The European Union, meanwhile, continues to chart its own course. The EU’s climate commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, emphasized that Trump’s opposition has not diminished European ambitions. "We’re doing the exact opposite of what the U.S. is doing, which, by the way, I find concerning and problematic," Hoekstra told The New York Times. The bloc has tentatively agreed to slash emissions by 66% to 72% by 2035 compared to 1990 levels, with final terms expected by the COP30 summit in Brazil this November. The EU’s approach is not just about hitting targets—it’s about reinforcing its role as a global leader in the clean energy transition, regardless of U.S. participation.
Back in the United States, the absence from the summit did not go unnoticed by all. California, long a bellwether for environmental policy, is pushing back against federal deregulation. Attorney General Rob Bonta has become a leading figure in the fight, spearheading lawsuits against Trump administration rollbacks and targeting misleading plastics recycling practices—most notably with a high-profile case against ExxonMobil. As Bonta explained, California is determined to use "facts, science, and law" to counter federal policies that undermine climate action. Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration has joined coalitions of states and cities to enforce climate and environmental laws, making clear that at least some U.S. actors remain committed to the fight against climate change.
Elsewhere on the global stage, the interplay between regulatory frameworks and industry realities continues to unfold. Malaysia, one of the world’s largest palm oil producers, recently welcomed the European Union’s decision to delay its anti-deforestation law. The Malaysian Palm Oil Council argued that the current EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) imposes heavy compliance costs and fails to reward responsible sustainability efforts, despite significant industry investments. The delay provides exporters more time to adapt and highlights the ongoing tension between global environmental regulations and the practicalities of trade and development.
All these developments underscore a central truth: while the U.S. federal government may have stepped back from climate leadership, the rest of the world is forging ahead. The diplomatic isolation of the United States on this issue is unprecedented, especially for a country that remains the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas and its second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Yet, as the events in New York made clear, the momentum for a cleaner, more sustainable future is now being driven by a broad coalition of nations, industries, and subnational actors determined to act—regardless of who sits in the White House.
The climate summit of September 2025 may well be remembered as a turning point, not just for the pledges made, but for the unmistakable signal that global climate action is no longer waiting for U.S. approval. The world is moving on, and the stakes for those left behind have never been higher.
