COP30: With Trump and numerous heads of state absent, is the climate summit still relevant?

A photograph from a decade ago, captured in Paris, now appears almost like an artifact from a bygone era. It depicts a line of dozens of dignitaries in dark suits posing before a massive "COP21 Paris" banner. At the center, then-UK Prime Minister David Cameron beams, standing next to the future King Charles III and just ahead of China’s Xi Jinping. To the far right, former US President Barack Obama is engaged in conversation with an individual who is largely cropped out of the frame—a testament to the sheer volume of leaders present that day, making it nearly impossible for the photographer to capture everyone.

This scene stands in stark contrast to the group photo taken this Thursday at the COP30 summit in Brazil. The lineup is significantly thinner: Xi and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not attend, nor did the leaders of approximately 160 other nations. Most notably, US President Donald Trump was missing. The Trump administration has effectively withdrawn from the process, confirming that no high-level officials will be sent this year. This mass absence prompts a critical question: Why continue to hold a two-week multinational gathering if so many key figures are absent?

Christiana Figueres, who led the UN’s climate process when the Paris Agreement was finalized, previously described the COP mechanism as "not fit for purpose" during last year’s conference. Joss Garman, a former climate activist now leading the think tank Loom, concurs, stating, "The golden era for multilateral diplomacy is over." He argues that climate politics has increasingly become a contest over who captures and controls the economic advantages of emerging energy sectors.

Given that carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise despite 29 previous summits aimed at reducing them, skeptics ask whether additional COP meetings can yield any meaningful results.

Trump and the Climate 'Con Job'

On his first day back in office, President Trump utilized his signature marker to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement, the 2015 UN treaty designed to keep global warming below 1.5°C. Addressing the UN General Assembly in September, he characterized the issue as a fraud, stating, "This 'climate change' - it's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world. If you don't get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail."

The administration has since moved to dismantle environmental safeguards, rolling back restrictions on oil, gas, and coal extraction. It has also signed billions of dollars in tax breaks for fossil fuel companies and opened federal lands for development. Furthermore, Trump and his team have urged global governments to scrap their "pathetic" renewable energy initiatives, advocating instead for the purchase of US oil and gas, sometimes threatening punitive tariffs for non-compliance. Consequently, Europe, Japan, and South Korea have agreed to purchase tens of billions of dollars in US hydrocarbons.

The administration’s goal is explicit: Trump aims to establish the US as the "number one energy superpower in the world." Simultaneously, he has worked to reverse the clean energy agenda of his predecessor, Joe Biden. This includes slashing subsidies and tax incentives for wind and solar power, withdrawing permits, canceling projects, and cutting research funding.

When asked to justify the administration’s stance in September, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright remarked, "Wind power in the United States has been subsidised for 33 years - isn't that enough? You've got to be able to walk on your own after 25 to 30 years of subsidies."

John Podesta, a senior climate adviser to both Obama and Biden, offers a different perspective. "The United States is taking a wrecking ball to clean energy," he asserts. "They're trying to take us back not to the 20th Century, but the 19th."

The impact of this US withdrawal is already visible. Last month, a landmark agreement intended to reduce global shipping emissions was abandoned after the US, alongside Saudi Arabia, successfully halted the negotiations. Many proponents of the COP process are alarmed by this trajectory. There is growing concern over what might happen if the US approach encourages other nations to lower their own climate commitments. Anna Aberg, a Research Fellow at Chatham House's Environment and Society program, highlights these worries.

Source: BBC News Generated at: 2025-11-10 00:09:19 UTC