EDITORIAL: The United States’ decision to sit out the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) meeting in China is not just unfortunate, it is also a damning statement about Washington’s evolving stance on climate action.
Once a leader in shaping global climate policy, the US under its current administration has adopted a posture of outright denial, undermining international efforts to combat what is arguably the greatest existential crisis of our time.
The absence of American representatives at the Hangzhou meeting is not a passive omission — it is an active blow to global climate science. By walking away from the IPCC, the US signals that it is no longer willing to engage in meaningful discourse on climate change, let alone lead by example.
Such an abdication of responsibility is not just a setback for global climate initiatives but a betrayal of the very principles of scientific inquiry and multilateral cooperation. With 2024 recorded as the hottest year ever, climate action should be intensifying, not regressing.
The IPCC assessments serve as the most authoritative scientific basis for policy decisions, guiding nations in setting targets and strategies. By withdrawing from this process, the US is deliberately blinding itself to the scientific consensus and encouraging other nations to follow suit. This is particularly dangerous in an era where populist leaders across the world are already looking for reasons to disregard climate commitments.
For countries like Pakistan, which contribute negligible greenhouse gas emissions yet suffer disproportionately from climate disasters, such an approach is nothing short of a major catastrophe.
The devastating floods of 2022, persistent droughts, and rising temperatures have already pushed millions of Pakistanis to the brink. Climate change is not a theoretical debate for Pakistan — it is an everyday reality that threatens food security, economic stability, and public health. Yet, while wealthier nations shirk their responsibilities, developing countries are expected to pick up the tab.
This is precisely why Pakistan has been forced into discussions with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) about a potential carbon levy. The IMF’s proposal, which includes a tax of up to Rs20 per litre on petroleum products, is being positioned as a tool to generate funds for green development projects.
But the fundamental question remains: why should Pakistan, already crippled by economic and environmental crises, be forced to bear the financial burden of climate change mitigation? Shouldn’t the responsibility lie with the major polluters who created this crisis in the first place?
There is also the issue of feasibility. Can Pakistan afford to implement such a levy without exacerbating inflation and economic distress? The government’s already stretched fiscal capacity has made it difficult to fund even the most essential development projects.
The Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) is riddled with inefficiencies, underfunding, and delays. If the revenue from the proposed carbon levy is not transparently allocated toward meaningful green initiatives, it risks becoming yet another tax burden with no real impact.
Pakistan must navigate these negotiations carefully. While climate financing is crucial, it cannot come at the cost of economic stability.
The global response to climate change must be rooted in equity, with the largest polluters paying their fair share. The US’s retreat from climate science sends a clear message: developing nations must fend for themselves.
But if countries like Pakistan are forced to implement new financial burdens in the name of climate action while major emitters remain indifferent, then the entire system is built on hypocrisy, not justice.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025