Trump’s Climate Pullout and the Stakes for Kenya and Africa

Kenya, 9 January 2026 - U.S. President Donald Trump is a leader of many surprises to the World.

He is a man who can wake up and make earth shuttering public pronouncements to everyone amusement.

Today, Trump’s latest decision to withdraw the U.S. from 66 international organisations, many of them linked to climate change, has sent shockwaves through global diplomacy, reopening old fault lines between the world’s largest historical emitters and regions bearing the heaviest climate burden despite contributing the least to the crisis.

Announcing the move, Trump framed it as a restoration of national sovereignty and economic common sense.

“The United States will no longer participate in international arrangements that are unfair, costly, and hostile to American interests,” he said, arguing that climate-focused institutions had become vehicles for “globalist agendas” that penalise U.S. industry while letting others off the hook.

He insisted that Washington would pursue environmental protection “on our own terms, in ways that grow the economy and protect American workers.”

The withdrawals include key climate and environmental bodies that shape global science, financing and negotiations.

For critics, the decision represents a deliberate dismantling of multilateral climate governance.

For Trump and his allies, it is a long-overdue correction.

“We are not going to keep paying billions of dollars into organisations that tell us how to run our country,” Trump said, adding that America had been treated as “a cash cow” while emerging economies continued to expand emissions.

That argument has particular resonance — and controversy — in Africa.

While some voices in U.S. political discourse increasingly portray Africa as a future emissions threat due to population growth and industrialisation, the continent currently accounts for a tiny fraction of global greenhouse gas output.

Kenya, often cited as a climate leader because of its heavy reliance on renewable energy, contributes a negligible share to global emissions yet faces severe droughts, floods and food insecurity.

For Nairobi, Trump’s pullback raises immediate and long-term concerns.

Kenya’s climate strategy relies heavily on multilateral frameworks to access climate finance, technology transfer and scientific support.

Reduced U.S. engagement weakens these platforms at a time when African states are pushing for faster delivery of adaptation funding and loss-and-damage mechanisms.

Climate negotiators fear that without Washington at the table, pressure on wealthy nations to honour financing commitments could soften.

The economic implications are equally significant.

Kenya hosts a major UN presence and has built a diplomatic and services ecosystem around multilateral institutions.

A contraction in U.S. support for international agencies risks shrinking programme budgets, reducing project pipelines and dampening the city’s status as a global diplomatic hub.

More from Kenya

Iliman Ndiaye’s First-Half Strike Sends Senegal Through to the AFCON Semi-finals

Turkey Seeks to Join Saudi-Pakistani Defence Alliance

For a country positioning itself as a regional centre for green investment and climate innovation, the signal sent by Washington is deeply unsettling.

Across Africa, reactions have been sharply critical.

Environmental advocates warn that the decision creates a leadership vacuum just as climate impacts intensify.

They argue that Trump’s framing — portraying climate institutions as anti-American — ignores the reality that climate change is already destabilising fragile economies and fuelling conflict, migration and humanitarian crises far beyond U.S. borders.

“This is not about ideology; it is about survival,” one African climate advocate remarked, Caren Oloo, said reflecting a widely shared sentiment on the continent.

Yet Trump’s move may also accelerate strategic shifts already underway.

African governments have grown accustomed to policy swings in Washington and are increasingly diversifying partnerships, deepening ties with Europe, Asia and the Gulf while exploring home-grown climate financing models.

There is renewed emphasis on continental cooperation, with African states seeking to present unified positions in climate talks and leverage collective bargaining power.

The controversy also sharpens the debate over responsibility.

Trump has repeatedly argued that the U.S. should not shoulder what he calls a disproportionate burden.

“We’re done apologising for our success,” he said, insisting that countries still industrialising must “take responsibility for their own emissions.”

African leaders counter that such rhetoric ignores historical emissions and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, which recognises that today’s climate crisis was largely created by early industrialisers.

For Kenya, the challenge is navigating this fractured global landscape without losing momentum.

The country’s investments in geothermal, wind and solar energy position it as a model for low-carbon development, but scaling these gains requires predictable international cooperation.

If major powers retreat, the cost of capital for green projects could rise, slowing progress just as climate impacts accelerate.

Ultimately, Trump’s withdrawal from climate-linked organisations is more than a U.S. domestic political statement.

It is a stress test for the global climate regime and a stark reminder for Africa that reliance on shifting political winds in major capitals carries risks. Whether the vacuum left by Washington deepens global climate paralysis or galvanises new forms of cooperation — particularly among developing nations — may define the next phase of climate politics.

For now, Kenya and its neighbours face a sobering reality: those least responsible for climate change may once again be forced to adapt fastest, even as the world’s biggest historical emitters argue over the rules of engagement.