Filenews 15 November 2025
Pressure from the United States to keep fossil fuels at the center of global energy policy appears to be strengthening oil-producing countries, giving them more bargaining power at the United Nations. The world was one step away from a historic agreement: the imposition of a global carbon tax on shipping. After years of negotiations, the member states of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) had come up with a plan aimed at limiting pollutants from merchant ships. Everything indicated that the initiative would be adopted at the October meeting.
Then Donald Trump reappeared. Upon returning to the White House for a second term, the US president launched a months-long campaign to block the deal. The US threatened tariffs, sanctions and visa restrictions on those countries that supported the measure. According to a senior State Department official, US diplomats and ministers mobilized internationally to put blunt pressure on their partners, even warning of blocking ships from US ports.
Under this suffocating pressure – or intimidation – an alliance of the US, Saudi Arabia and Iran voted to postpone the vote for a year, effectively burying the initiative.
According to Feig Abbasov of the European organization Transport & Environment, the US "intimidated countries that initially supported the zero-emissions plan in shipping", waging a "war against multilateral diplomacy and climate action itself".
Seemingly, Washington has withdrawn from the climate battle. Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement again, while he did not send an official US delegation to COP30 in Brazil. But that doesn't mean the US has stepped aside; Instead, they are fighting on the opposite side.
From the first moment of his return to the White House, Trump has used trade negotiations, tariff threats and diplomatic pressure to push countries to abandon their commitments to renewable sources and turn to US oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG). Ten months after taking power, governments and businesses are succumbing to the new energy agenda.
White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers argued that the president is implementing a "common-sense energy policy" that will not jeopardize "U.S. economic and national security for vague climate goals that destroy other economies."
Risks
Supporters of the oil industry welcome this approach. Tom Pyle, head of the American Energy Alliance, said Trump was "redefining the debate" by giving political cover to banks, governments and companies looking for an excuse to reconsider their green commitments.
For environmentalists, however, Trump's stance is a dangerous setback. Jake Schmidt of the Natural Resources Defense Council emphasizes that the new administration "casts a much wider net of climate destruction than in Trump's first term", now having "more people, better organization and a clear plan".
U.S. pressure is manifested on many fronts. On trade, Trump has already extracted billions in pledges from allies to invest in U.S. energy projects. Japan has agreed to invest $550 billion in the United States, aiming among other things to finance an LNG pipeline and terminal in Alaska. South Korea has pledged $100 billion in purchases, while the European Union has said it will spend about $750 billion on U.S. energy imports in exchange for lower tariffs on its exports to the United States.
Analysts express doubts whether these purchases will be fully implemented, as they would require a tripling of European energy imports from the US. However, the commitment itself is seen as a political earthquake for a continent leading the way in the "Green Deal" and zero-emission targets.
At the same time, the Trump administration is pressuring the EU to relax restrictions on methane imports and weaken business sustainability obligations. These pressures coincided with similar requests from Berlin and major European groups, leading to a retreat of European environmental policy.
Washington is also pushing the International Energy Agency (IEA) to amend its forecasts to present more optimistic scenarios for fossil fuels, while encouraging development banks to finance oil and gas projects instead of green investments.
Trump himself, speaking at the UN General Assembly, openly attacked countries "swept away by the deception of climate change", while urging British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to abandon wind farms and exploit North Sea oil reserves.
Bullying
Compared to his first term, Trump's new approach is more aggressive and international. If then the slogan was "drill, baby, drill", now it is a global campaign against the energy transition. As Abigail Ines of the London School of Economics observes, the US seeks "to divide partners and weaken international cooperation".
Trump's influence will hover heavily over the negotiations. "Countries like Saudi Arabia feel encouraged to promote fossil fuels," says Linda Kalcher of the Strategic Perspectives think tank. A European diplomat noted that "the main goal now at the summit is simply not to succumb to intimidation".
Trump's policy is pushing several countries to turn to China, in search of stability and zero-emission technology. As Professor Ioannis Ioannou of the London Business School notes, "many politicians and businessmen say: 'better the devil you know'; China offers more stability than the U.S. government."
Adaptation – Editing: George D. Pavlopoulos
