Donald Trump might just have signed a proclamation designating March “Irish-American heritage month”, and declared Irish-Americans “great people [who] voted for me in heavy numbers”, but make no mistake; a chasm has opened up in Irish and American political relations where so much common understanding used to be. That mutual understanding went back to our admiration for its founding constitution and for so many of its presidents, both Republican and Democrat. While we were not blind to the misuses and abuses of power that took place in the name of protecting freedom, America’s claim to lead the free world was credible.
The US helped draft the United Nations charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and it paid most to keep the multilateral system going ever since the second World War. That is no longer the case. In this US administration, calling someone a “globalist” seems to be the worst insult possible. Elon Musk is publicly supporting a US withdrawal from the UN as well as Nato, having filleted the USAid budget on day one in his new office. We are seeing a shift towards a transactional world, where the most powerful get the best deals, while multilateralism, with all its costs, compromises and complications, is left for dead.
This runs contrary to everything Ireland believes in. Irish foreign policy is centred on support for UN institutions as well as the European Union. That belief in the fundamental rights enshrined in the UN charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights is why we stand up for the people of Palestine and Ukraine and it’s why for decades our soldiers have worn blue helmets and risked their lives holding UN peacekeeping lines. As you walk into Government Buildings on Merrion Street, you are faced with a UN flag as well as the Tricolour and the flag of Europe. That is a good reflection of how our entire system thinks and works.
But what do we do next, given what is happening in the US?
We are going to be tested in several different ways, especially around tariffs and what happens in Ukraine and the Middle East. But another key question will be whether we continue to commit to the Paris climate agreement, which was one of the first multilateral agreements President Trump walked away from. This is an immediate issue because in the next few months the Government is going to have to agree on a commitment for the next 2040 target period. It will also revise the National Development Plan in July, which will tell us whether it is serious about the climate commitments we are already making.
The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council and the Climate Change Advisory Council provided a blunt and sobering reminder last week of the massive financial consequences behind those targets. We could face fines of between €8 billion and €26 billion for not meeting our existing 2030 commitments. It is impossible to know what the final cost might be, because it depends on how big the demand and market will be for the surplus carbon credits.
[ Five ways to slash Ireland’s looming multibillion-euro climate finesOpens in new window ]
No doubt some sceptics will now argue that Europe should follow the US lead and pull out from such a hard task, so we don’t have to meet our obligations. Perhaps some civil servants might also calculate that these fines may never come, because others in Europe will in the end want to get off the same hook. That is a mistake because Europe’s economic and security interests now align with the need for strong environmental action.
What is increasingly clear is that Europe will never be secure if we have to rely on imported fossil fuels, whether they come from Siberia, North Dakota or the Gulf. Similarly we are never going to be more competitive by burning other people’s fuels, which have to be transported long distances to get here. For all the recent weakening of EU environmental regulations, the clean industrial deal announced by the European Commission last week again makes it clear we are still set on the same decarbonisation course. If anything, what is happening in the US strengthens the case for ambition.
The calculation must be that the US will fall behind, as the rest of the world continues to advance the already unfolding clean industrial revolution. All the tariffs and American exceptionalism will only reduce its exports and increase its capital outflows, to make the US’s long term position worse. Ironically, asTrump seeks to drop oil prices by increasing production, prices are more likely to fall because we will cut demand, for our own economic gain. The fiscal and climate advisory councils’ report compellingly frames meeting our climate targets as an opportunity to invest in the future rather than pay fines due to a lack of political conviction. Our problem is not a dearth of plans and policy papers, but rather the slow speed and high cost of delivering change on the ground. That failing is compounded by a rapid loss of political support when carbon-cutting measures – a lane for a bike where a car lane used to be, for example – are to be delivered. It is only then that politicians realise that climate action will be disruptive and not immediately popular, so they reverse engines and revert to business as usual.
The reality we face in the world today is that disruption is coming whether we like it or not. The question is whether we continue to be a nation which stands up for international co-operation and justice, including on climate, or whether we support a new transactional world order.
