"The U.S. withdrawal from the Kyoto protocol endangers the entire process"
About this Quote
Calling the U.S. exit from Kyoto a threat to "the entire process" is less a technocratic observation than a diplomatic warning shot. Laurent Fabius is speaking the language of international negotiations, where the real object isn’t just emissions targets but momentum: the fragile belief that multilateral climate action can ratchet forward over time. "Process" sounds bland on purpose. It’s a placeholder for trust, compliance, and the willingness of other countries to keep showing up when the biggest player walks out.
The specific intent is to reframe withdrawal as systemic sabotage, not a domestic policy tweak. Kyoto was built on a bargain: industrialized nations accept binding limits, developing nations get time and flexibility. When the United States steps away, it doesn’t merely reduce global emissions cuts; it undermines the deal logic that makes future agreements possible. Fabius is signaling a cascade risk: other governments can use U.S. nonparticipation as political cover to soften their own commitments, while skeptics inside their parliaments ask why they should accept economic constraints competitors refuse.
The subtext is also reputational. This is about leadership and credibility, not just carbon accounting. Coming from a French statesman steeped in EU climate diplomacy, the line doubles as a bid to isolate Washington and consolidate a counter-coalition: if the U.S. won’t anchor the regime, others must. It’s an argument designed to make unilateralism look reckless, and multilateralism look like the only adult option left.
The specific intent is to reframe withdrawal as systemic sabotage, not a domestic policy tweak. Kyoto was built on a bargain: industrialized nations accept binding limits, developing nations get time and flexibility. When the United States steps away, it doesn’t merely reduce global emissions cuts; it undermines the deal logic that makes future agreements possible. Fabius is signaling a cascade risk: other governments can use U.S. nonparticipation as political cover to soften their own commitments, while skeptics inside their parliaments ask why they should accept economic constraints competitors refuse.
The subtext is also reputational. This is about leadership and credibility, not just carbon accounting. Coming from a French statesman steeped in EU climate diplomacy, the line doubles as a bid to isolate Washington and consolidate a counter-coalition: if the U.S. won’t anchor the regime, others must. It’s an argument designed to make unilateralism look reckless, and multilateralism look like the only adult option left.
Quote Details
| Topic | Nature |
|---|
More Quotes by Laurent
Add to List

