This study examines how the Trump administration repositioned the US in global climate governance, providing a multifaceted and theoretically informed evaluation of its geopolitical, institutional, and ideological effects. The analysis, which is framed by political realism, strategic environmentalism, adaptive federalism, and socio-technical transition theory, shows how Trump's climate policy, exemplified by his defunding of the Green Climate Fund and withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, represented a strategic disruption of multilateral climate cooperation. A framework based on emissions power parity and competitive decarbonization replaced normative commitments to historical emissions and equity, marking a redefinition of climate responsibility around sovereignty, economic nationalism, and "energy dominance" rather than a straightforward act of denial. The study offers a comprehensive analysis of the Trump administration's climate policy in seven thematic areas, drawing on a wealth of interdisciplinary literature: global governance, energy geopolitics, environmental justice, disinformation, legal-institutional frameworks, cultural narratives, and sustainable finance. It highlights paradoxical results as unexpected but revolutionary effects of Trump's unilateralism, including deregulation-driven innovation in clean technologies, the adaptability of subnational actors, and China's strategic ascent to the top of the global climate leadership. In order to demonstrate how nationalist policy logics can both undermine and rebalance the global climate regime, the study presents new conceptual tools such as "defensive climate investment," "innovation protectionism," and "geopolitical decarbonization." This paper concludes by arguing that the Trump administration's climate stance signalled a structural realignment in global climate diplomacy, highlighting the weaknesses of multilateral institutions and igniting forces of geopolitical reordering and decentralized innovation. The findings offer a novel narrative that transcends dichotomous assessments of climate denialism and offers a sophisticated perspective on how nationalist upheavals can alter the framework of international environmental governance. The study's conclusion offers policy-relevant insights for rethinking climate leadership in a time of competition, fragmentation, and the emergence of climate techno-nationalisms.
Samuel Nwokolo (Thu,) studied this question.