On the opening day of the 80th United Nations General Assembly in New York, President Donald Trump used his address to deliver a sharp critique of climate activism and multilateral climate agreements, declaring that climate change is “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world.” His remarks were met with immediate, widespread pushback from the scientific community, environmental advocates, and many world leaders who reiterated the strength of the scientific consensus on human-driven climate change.
In his nearly hour-long speech, Trump forcefully attacked European carbon-reduction strategies, arguing they undermine economic performance. He questioned investments in renewable energy, warned that countries embracing “green” transitions were jeopardizing their prosperity, and blamed climate agendas for hampering growth. He doubled down on skepticism toward international institutions, dismissing predictions from the United Nations and other environmental bodies and criticizing those who espouse them.
Observers at the UN and beyond responded swiftly. António Guterres, the UN Secretary-General, reaffirmed the organization’s commitment to supporting countries in meeting emissions targets and warned that dismissing climate science endangers global efforts to contain warming. Climate scientists, many of whom had closely followed the address, pointed out that Trump’s criticisms mischaracterized decades of peer-reviewed research, which overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that human activity is a primary driver of recent climate change.
Several global leaders used their own addresses to counter Trump’s narrative, emphasizing that resilience, decarbonization, and sustainable technology are central to future growth. Some urged greater collaboration among states to accelerate green infrastructure and clean energy deployment. Others warned that U.S. retreat from multilateral climate commitments could slow global momentum and embolden dissenting voices in vulnerable nations.
Though the speech was delivered on the international stage, its implications for U.S. climate and energy policy are consequential. Trump’s framing signals that the administration may lean more heavily toward fossil fuels, roll back regulatory support for renewables, and de-emphasize multilateral climate frameworks. Already, analysts are speculating on how this posture may shape U.S. contributions in upcoming climate negotiations, funding commitments, and regulatory priorities in energy, emissions, and environmental standards.
Trump’s rejection of climate activism in his UN address highlights a larger tension: how scientific consensus, economic arguments, and political narratives intersect in shaping global climate policy. While the world hears skepticism from one of its most powerful voices, many governments, institutions, and civil societies continue pushing forward with decarbonization plans, climate finance pledges, and strategies to adapt to warming that is already underway.
