Discussion » Questions » Politics » Why don't countries impose economic sanctions on US as a result of Trump pulling out of Paris?
Standard Alien

Why don't countries impose economic sanctions on US as a result of Trump pulling out of Paris?

I thought of this idea during a MUN conference on the UNFCCC and it seems like something pretty obvious that should already be happening, which is why I'm confused. Since the Trump Admin pulled out of Paris and the US is also the second largest fossil fuel producer in the world (China is #1), why haven't progressive countries that are major trading partners of the US passed a UN resolution encouraging these countries to impose economic sanctions of the US until the Trump Admin actually does something about climate change? This seems like the most logical strategy for dealing with the Trump Administration and its dismissal of global warming. What are the technical problems with this solution? Is it not happening already because countries don't want to risk minor detriment to their economies? They might not even have to put their economies on the line, because the resolution would most likely remain an ultimatum—does the US economy suffer more than it already will under Trump, or does White House suck it up and pass some environmental legislation? What do you think about this strategy?

Posted - July 5, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • 44617
    Long question...short answer: They would go broke.
      July 5, 2017 2:52 PM MDT
    4

  • 83
    Why would they go broke? Not every country would be doing this, only the ones for which it would be economically feasible. And it's more of a threat—all these countries united against the US—rather than an actual thing that will happen.
      July 5, 2017 3:10 PM MDT
    0

  • 17596
    Read element's answer again.
      July 5, 2017 2:53 PM MDT
    1

  • 46117
    Why doesn't someone just off that PIG?

    Save us a lot of time.

    And money.

      July 5, 2017 2:55 PM MDT
    0

  • The US is a major economic trade partner for many nations.  Sanctions would interfere with that trade and likely create huge financial loss for the country imposing the sanctions.
      July 5, 2017 3:22 PM MDT
    3

  • 22891
    not sure why
      July 5, 2017 3:51 PM MDT
    0

  • 5354
    Bad idea. Just check how France got treated after refusing to take part in the Iraq 2 idiocy.
      July 5, 2017 4:17 PM MDT
    0

  • See Element's answer. I agree with the pull-out. Why pay an enormous amount of money for something we can do on our own.  
      July 5, 2017 5:29 PM MDT
    1

  • 2500
    That's a terrific idea!

    Perhaps they can start by refusing all those nasty foreign aide payments that they accept through USAID and other Federal agencies. Heck, they could really punch the US in the nose by returning money that's already been sent to them.
      July 6, 2017 5:46 PM MDT
    0

  • I think the Wu-Tang Clan said it best.

    Cash rules everything around me. ( C.R.E.A.M.) Get the money.  Dollar, dollar bill. Y'all
      July 7, 2017 1:38 PM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    Even if they wanted to ... it would never pass as a UN resolution.
    Why?  Because the US has permanent veto power.
    So do China and Russia.
    And no matter how many other nations want to pass a resolution, all it takes is ONE nation with veto power to stop it.

    NOTE:  Many cities in the US are saying they will abide by the Paris agreement.
    Since it wasn't a treaty, it doesn't have to go through Congress or the federal government.
    And all it would take is 600 cities, to pull the US into compliance anyway. This post was edited by Walt O'Reagun at July 7, 2017 1:43 PM MDT
      July 7, 2017 1:41 PM MDT
    0