The U.S. midterms were not fought on climate policy, and the Democrats’ overwhelming win should not be read as a sign that the United States is on a clear path back to climate leadership. But there are good reasons to think the shift can still prove significant for global climate action.
Over the past two years, opponents of climate action have tried—with some success—to make retreat seem inevitable. That narrative has overshadowed how many countries are still choosing to work together and the progress they are making on issues that have long divided them.
Negotiating the Paris Agreement taught me that a collective commitment can change the future people expect and are willing to invest in—and get the people and institutions with the power to build it moving.
In April, for example, 57 countries met in Santa Marta, Colombia, to work through how to remove the barriers to transitioning away from fossil fuels. They included developed and developing countries, fossil fuel importers and producers—from Germany and Canada to Brazil and Nigeria. The E.U., China, and Brazil, meanwhile, have formed a new coalition on carbon markets. The effort is essential to cutting industrial emissions without putting domestic producers at a disadvantage—and it’s one of the thorniest issues in climate diplomacy. Their decision to work together is a significant political step.
Why have these countries chosen to keep working together, and why has no country followed the United States out of the Paris Agreement? Because nearly every government recognizes that climate change and energy insecurity threaten its core national interests—and that, in a deeply interdependent world, protecting those interests requires working with others, however difficult the politics.
The latest fossil fuel shock triggered by the war in Iran and worsening climate impacts are making those shared interests harder to ignore. For decades, the oil and gas industry has promoted the idea that energy security means ensuring more reliable and diverse supplies. The Hormuz crisis is forcing governments to reconsider that logic. Even diversified supply cannot shield countries from large shocks in global markets, as the American experience with soaring fuel prices shows. Meanwhile, batteries, solar panels, and electric vehicles keep getting better and cheaper. Their uptake has accelerated since the Hormuz crisis began, as people around the world seek to protect themselves from volatile fuel prices. Outside China and the United States, sales of electric cars rose by an estimated 45% in the first eight months of this year compared with the same period in 2025.
At the same time, as the extreme heat and wildfires this year showed us, climate disasters are taking lives and inflicting economic losses on a scale that governments can no longer afford to ignore. The U.N. Environment Programme has confirmed that the world is set to exceed 1.5°C of warming. Every additional fraction of a degree will increase those losses and the risk of crossing irreversible tipping points.
There is no denying that the world’s global superpower rejecting climate action and multilateralism has made it harder for countries to act on these interests. Over the past two years, Washington has not just rejected climate action; it has actively tried to stop others moving ahead, threatening tariffs on countries backing a levy on shipping emissions and seeking to keep climate change off the G7 and G20 agendas. Its aggressive stance has also helped push the E.U. into watering down some of its own climate regulations.
The midterms offer no guarantee that Washington’s pressure will ease. But they expose the emptiness of the Trump Administration’s promise that fossil fuels will deliver affordable energy. Politicians elsewhere should take note: climate denial is no answer to voters’ worries about their bills. Other countries should feel greater confidence in pursuing their own interests, rather than allowing the threat of U.S. retaliation to set the limits of their ambition. By acting together, middle powers can give one another more room to withstand pressure from Washington.
There are more and more reasons to act, and fewer to hold back. At the annual U.N. climate conference this year, known as COP31, a broad group of countries spanning traditional divides wants to pledge to use clean electricity to replace fossil fuels. Major fossil fuel importers such as Europe and clean technology suppliers like China have a strong stake in that effort. American states, cities, and businesses are also expected to show up in force in Antalya, Turkey, the conference’s host city, eager to work with international partners without waiting for federal policy to change. Together, they could send a powerful signal of intent.
