Six World Leaders on Navigating Climate Change, Without the U.S.
Sept. 19, 2025
The Marshall Islands
Australia
Guyana
Kenya
Finland
Bangladesh
Sept. 19, 2025
Share full article
0
International collaboration on climate change is fraying. The Trump administration withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement, the 2015 treaty aiming to limit global warming, and has penalized the renewable-energy business and promoted fossil fuels. Ten years after Paris, a vast majority of countries are not on pace to meet their climate targets. With the United States sidelined and China ascendant as a clean-energy superpower, the global map of alliances on climate action is being redrawn. On top of all this, the planet keeps warming.
Debates around climate change often focus on the world’s largest economies and biggest emitters. But much of the hard work of figuring out how to adapt — both to a hotter planet and to a new geopolitical landscape — is happening in countries that have contributed relatively little to the problem yet are still navigating complex climate-related issues. Hoping to better understand how global warming and the changing world order are affecting some of these often-overlooked places, I spoke with six world leaders from different geographic regions. I heard some common themes: the ravages of extreme weather, the difficulties posed by the Trump administration’s retreat. But these conversations also illustrated the intensely varied predicaments facing world leaders right now.
The Marshall Islands, scattered in the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and Papua New Guinea, consists of five main islands and 29 atolls — small low-lying islands formed by coral reefs. The total land mass is roughly the size of Washington, D.C., and the average height above sea level for the entire country is just seven feet. President Hilda C. Heine, who is serving a second stint in office, has spent much of her career working to sound the alarm about rising temperatures. But with each year, the challenges grow. Mosquito-borne diseases have spread because of more frequent rainfall. The islands’ economy relies on the sale of tuna that foreign fishing fleets catch in their waters; now tuna are leaving for cooler parts of the Pacific. Many young residents are moving abroad. And as the planet continues to warm and glaciers melt, this tiny country may be among the first to be swallowed by the sea. Read the interview
How is climate change affecting the Marshall Islands? We will be submerged by 2050 if the world doesn’t do its part. We have a population of around 37,000. Ten years ago, we had closer to 50,000.
And what is driving that migration? One reason is that when we have regular inundations, some people, rather than rebuilding their homes, decide to go away and settle in the U.S.Sea-level rise is becoming scary for many of us.
Do you think your citizens make a direct connection between things like rising seas, airborne diseases and climate change? Yes, this conversation has been ongoing for many years. We have climate change in our curriculum. So our kids are growing up understanding the issues. People know that big emitters — the rich countries — are causing this, that we have no contribution to the greenhouse-gas emissions that are destroying the world and our livelihood. Our people are not complacent, but they have accepted the fact that big inequities exist and powerful countries get away with unacceptable behaviors. We are used to that mentality and attitude, since we have lived with the impact of the U.S. nuclear-testing program on our islands for 70 years.
What do you think developed nations owe countries like the Marshall Islands? The plan for elevating only two of our communities is projected to cost us billions. It’s a lot of money. I wish that the big emitters could step up and put money into that, because that could really help.
Do you feel differently about what international collaboration on climate change can accomplish now than you did at the beginning of your career? I have a positive outlook, despite everything that is happening. I think the fact that we are sitting at the table now — before, you know, it wasn’t as easy to be part of the discussions. The small-island developing states have been able to organize themselves and to be heard.
What has participating in those discussions been like for you? This is the 10th year of the Paris Agreement, and we’ve been hearing the same excuses from big emitters. You know, they’re very comfortable, and they don’t want to move from their comfort level.
What impact does the U.S. withdrawal from Paris have on the world’s ability to take action on this issue? It’s unfortunate that the U.S. has decided to step out of Paris. But there are those who rally together, because there are no other options for them. And so I think people are coming together stronger than before because you cannot rely on the U.S. in this respect. Something positive is happening, even though it’s not at the level that the Marshall Islands and other small developing countries have been advocating.
‘Big emitters are very comfortable, and they don’t want to move from their comfort level.’
What specific steps are you taking in the Marshall Islands to combat the effects of climate change? The warming of the ocean is killing our corals, which are building blocks of atoll nations. We are currently doing research to determine species of corals that can survive the warming ocean. Big emitters could provide research. Even though we are not contributing to emission levels, we are doing what we can to decrease greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We are building a fleet of ships that use wind and solar power to replace our fossil-fuel-run shipping fleet.
Do you think your country will survive? As the leader of the Marshall Islands, I cannot take the view that we cannot survive. One important thing we’ve done is register our boundaries with the United Nations, making sure that the world recognizes our boundaries, regardless of whether we’re underwater or above water. So in that respect, the country will survive.
What are some of the changes your people have had to make to their daily lives as you navigate all this? Seven years ago, Majuro had no sea walls. Now we build sea walls to protect homes and schools. I mean, we used to be able to just walk into the lagoon. Now you have to go over sea walls to get to the lagoon side or to the ocean side. The landscape is different. I’ll share a poem that was put together by my daughter, Kathy Jetn̄il-Kijiner. It’s a reflection on how people are feeling about what’s happening.My cousinhad a nightmarethat we keptbuilding seawallshigher andhigherall aroundour islandup tothe skyuntil suddenlywe wereat the bottomof a wishing welllookingupat the world.
When Australia dries out and temperatures spike during the summer, fires sweep the country, charring the countryside and turning skies black. And the firestorms are just one of many extreme weather events, including typhoons, floods and droughts, now battering the country. The geographical enormousness of Australia means that climate change has a wide range of regional impacts. When I spoke to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in August, parts of the country were blanketed in snow, a very unusual cold spell even for the Australian winter. Albanese told me that since becoming prime minister in 2022, he had already visited all six states in the wake of natural disasters. As the world’s 14th-largest economy, Australia also faces a monumental challenge in reducing emissions. The country remains reliant on fossil fuels, including coal, which generates nearly half its electricity. But Albanese has been outspoken in calling for Australia to be a global leader in lowering emissions and embracing renewables. Read the interview
In Australia, climate has historically been a divisive issue. You seem to have gotten past the partisanship somewhat. How have you done that? I wouldn’t say there is a consensus here now. There are attempts by some in our opposition who are currently trying to remove, for example, the support for net zero by 2050. We have a green political party that would say net zero by 2035. Now, if you do that, you’re not going to achieve it; you’re going to threaten energy security, and therefore you’ll lose community support. If you just say, “Yeah, 100 percent renewable by tomorrow,” then you will lose support. You’ve got to take people with you on the journey. Our predecessors had 22 different energy policies and didn’t land one.
I try to speak about climate change as a challenge, but also an opportunity. To speak about the cost of inaction through the disasters that we’re seeing, but also the benefit in embracing the transition to clean energy. We are in a position where we’re trying to shift the agenda from one of “Why are you spending money on this?” to the return that comes from acting. One of the things that is said by climate skeptics in Australia is, “Oh, well, we’re only a couple of percent of the world’s emissions, so anything we do doesn’t matter.” That’s where the argument about economic benefit from action as opposed to inaction needs to be made.
Do you believe that the framework for international collaboration is actually effective? The challenge that the globe faces on this and so many other areas is the tension between international action and national sovereignty. I don’t think there’s a shortcut around the U.N. framework. As much as it is not ideal, I don’t see that there’s another option. What we’ve seen is a rise of nationalism and individualism from many countries. But it is also in the interest of nations and states for there to be good global outcomes. No country will be immune from action if we see an ongoing rise in levels of climate change, which means more climate refugees, which means other international changes as well. And these things are linked with national security, too.
You’re a big importer of Chinese-made solar panels. How do you see China right now? Is it a threat to a country like Australia, or is it a benefit because they are making so many of these technologies cheap and affordable? Well, it is a source of some regret. I think that there’s not a solar panel in the world that doesn’t have intellectual property that was created in Australia. Now, part of my argument is that we missed out on the commercial benefit. Just literally today, my minister and I were in South Australia announcing a nearly sixfold increase in manufacturing of solar panels at one of our plants there. China was smart to ramp up its investment in manufacturing, as it has been dominating critical minerals. What that could be is a lesson for countries so that, if there is potential trade disruption, there is less risk if other parts of the globe are also manufacturing.
This is something we’re going through here, where the Trump administration is penalizing the development of renewable energy and promoting fossil fuels. What is your response to what the U.S. is doing? We’re really focused on working in the Pacific in particular. We have a climate-change structure fund that is supporting the lowering of emissions in our own region.I think we don’t get into what other countries are doing, including the United States. That’s a matter for them as a sovereign nation. What it potentially does is open up opportunities in other parts. The countries that will succeed economically, in my view, are countries that continue to move forward.
Tucked beside Venezuela and Brazil, Guyana is full of lush tropical rainforests and has started innovative programs to protect its biodiversity. It is also an ascendant oil exporter and is set for some extraordinary growth in oil production in the years ahead. President Mohamed Irfaan Ali feels this paradox intensely. Last year, he accused a BBC reporter of “lecturing” him on climate change and railed against the moral “hypocrisy” of Western nations who criticize Guyana while denying financial support for environmental conservation. When we spoke, Ali described how his government is working to defend against sea-level rise and deforestation. At the same time, he spoke proudly of growing revenues from fossil-fuel production and of putting some of those profits into Guyana’s renewable-energy transition. Read the interview
When you see the U.S. retreat from engagement in climate issues, what does that mean for Guyana? The withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement is a major blow. We can’t debate that. The U.S. is not only a major emitter of greenhouse gases, but it wields tremendous influence in global affairs. The climate crisis is an existential crisis for many of us. We simply cannot afford to fold our hands and do nothing. We’re working closely with our neighbors, especially Brazil and Suriname, on forest biodiversity and resilience. With the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement, then predictability on financing becomes an issue. It opens up a floodgate for others to also be unpredictable in the policy-making environment. Everything that surrounds climate change, commitment and policy requires global consensus, basically.
Is the global community actually making the financing available so that nations like Guyana can undergo the energy transition? Absolutely not. It’s ridiculous sometimes to listen to the pledges, because none of the pledges is actualized. When you ask the developing world to adopt measures to limit the impact of whatever we are doing on climate, you’re asking us to transition when we have major issues on energy equality, energy poverty, energy access. And then to complicate issues, these very countries are asked to function in a digital world, so they are already suffering from immense poverty because they were never able to adapt to the Industrial Revolution. Now they are moving into the digital revolution with A.I. that they will never be able to catch up with. And at the same time, basic things like clean water, access to electricity — major segments of the population don’t have this. This is something that has severely impacted the quality and equity of global policy-making. And there is no clear path and no clear plan as to how we are going to address these issues.
I heard implicitly in what you just said that climate change is the ultimate long-term problem in a world that is so often consumed with these short-term crises. I would put it even better: It’s a sacrificial lamb. Climate change is a sacrificial lamb that is always postponed. If you look at the last five years, we have not accelerated momentum. We have really stagnated. We are not implementing what we commit ourselves to do globally.
One thing that has not stagnated is temperature rise. What will this mean for the people of Guyana? If we did not have the type of revenue stream that we have now, it would have meant debt. It would have meant destruction. It would have meant our economy just falling apart. Guyana is a new oil producer, but we are using the resource to finance our energy transition, to build resilient infrastructure, to support the region that we are in, to invest in livelihood options that will keep our forest standing, which stores many gigatons of carbon. We’re investing in solar farms, hydro, natural gas, wind and biomass, all aimed at transitioning to a low-emission energy grid. We are building off-grid systems, solar farms, wind farms for the hinterland community, where the Indigenous people live.
‘Climate change is a sacrificial lamb.’
You talk about how, for Guyana, the answer to coping with a hotter world is in fact being funded by the production of more fuels that are causing that warming. That of course is sort of the conundrum in a nutshell, right? I don’t see it as a problem. Your question in the context of Guyana is quite different from your question in the Middle East, or your question in one of the industrial countries. For us, it’s quite different.
How do you see a way out? We have this standing forest that has been there for all our lives, which the world does not see a value in. It’s easy. If the world says, “We’re going to pay a fair-market rate for the forests that have ecological and biodiversity sources that also have a price,” then it will allow countries like ours that are forested to then use the revenue from that to protect our land, to invest in health, to invest in education, human development and infrastructure, to remain competitive and to build a strong and resilient economy. So the moral question is: Who can produce what the world needs in the least environmentally damaging way? Because let’s be clear on this too. We can’t be naïve. The world will need fossil fuel a long time into the future.
President William Ruto of Kenya has worked to position himself as Africa’s climate leader. He promotes Kenya’s gains in bringing electricity to a majority of its population. And he points to the country’s energy system, which is powered in large part by biofuels and wind and solar power, rather than coal, oil and gas. To hear Ruto tell it, Africa has the potential to become a global powerhouse in renewable energy. It’s a compelling vision, but as Ruto himself has discovered, realizing it is no easy feat. Many African countries, including Kenya, have struggled to obtain competitive financing for clean-energy projects. And many citizens who find basic government services lacking have not thrilled to Ruto’s focus on pressing for global climate action. Over the past year, antigovernment protests have broken out across Kenya, with dozens killed by the police amid anger over currency fluctuations, rising living costs and subpar infrastructure. But Ruto says he remains optimistic that his people will come around to his vision. Read the interview
How is climate change affecting Kenya? Just in the last 10 years, we have experienced three very serious droughts. In one, we lost close to two and a half million heads of livestock. We incurred costs upward of $1.5 billion on the loss of livestock alone. We lost many lives because of floods that followed. Between 5 and 10 percent of our economy is washed away every time we have a drought or flood. Climate change is not a myth. It is not a story. It is not far-fetched. It is a lived reality every day.
There has been real pushback within Kenya on the degree to which you are focused on international issues around climate rather than domestic issues. There have been protests. You’ve been criticized for police crackdowns. I see protests happen in many other countries. I see demonstrations in America. I see demonstrations in France and Europe. The reason that maybe you don’t see as much protesting in the rest of our continent is largely because not many countries are as democratic as Kenya. There is always a balance between the right to protest and the degeneration of protest into riots, destruction of property and life. And the police have a very delicate job. I don’t envy their position. But this is part of the growing of a nation.
But talking to your countrymen, how do you explain your focus on something that can seem very abstract to people who are still just struggling to get by day to day? Climate change is not just a global issue. It is a very domestic matter as well. Droughts made millions of Kenyans go hungry. Floods just in the city of Nairobi killed over 30 people. Nobody can persuasively tell any Kenyan that climate change is abstract. It is not.
Do you feel like the effort to coordinate global climate action has been effective? In the last three years, ever since we came together as a continent and pushed one continental position, what looked impossible is now beginning to be a reality. We just came back from a meeting of the U.N. where we were discussing development and financing. And it is generally acceptable now that countries like Kenya should be considered for financing. There was a time when we said this and it looked like a joke.
How exactly have things changed in those conversations? I think there is now a realization that we need debt relief, debt restructuring, because many countries, including Kenya, spend a lot of resources on managing the effects of climate change. And we’ve had, many times, to reorganize our resources because, when it comes to emissions, we are paying for a crime that others committed.
‘Nobody can persuasively tell any Kenyan that climate change is abstract. It is not.’
Does international collaboration on climate change work if the United States is rowing in the opposite direction? My brother, no situation is permanent.We may have a difficult situation now, but I believe that no one country can solve the problem of climate change alone. No one region, however powerful, however mighty. Solving this requires the participation, the collaboration, of everybody. And so I am very confident that the position of the United States, of China, of Europe, of Africa must come together at some point. We may disagree for a moment, we may disagree for a while, but reality is going to beat us into an agreement, because we have no option. The effects of climate change are in every continent. The only difference is that developed countries can cushion themselves. If the people in our continent cannot find life bearable in this continent, no amount of building borders and erecting roadblocks will block people from moving around the globe.
What’s your response when you see President Trump withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, essentially saying that he doesn’t believe climate change is an urgent threat? I have come across many leaders, and I don’t think President Trump is alone. But that does not remove the reality of what climate change is. The science is stubborn. The reality and facts are clear. Governments will come and go, leaders will move on, but the situation will be here. The reality will be staring at us.
In recent years, Finland has done something unusual: It has managed to cut down on carbon emissions while growing its economy. Of course, it helps that the Finnish public is wildly supportive of government action on climate. Still, Finland is notable for having one of the most aggressive climate targets in the world, with a commitment to being carbon neutral by 2035. The country has made major investments in wind energy, nuclear power, hydropower and biofuels, which account for nearly all of Finland’s electricity. But going green is not easy in every sector. Finland is still reliant on oil beause of the slow uptake of clean alternatives for shipping fuel. When we spoke in July, Prime Minister Petteri Orpo described a nation being transformed by rising temperatures. The Arctic, including Finland, is warming nearly four times as fast as the global average, he said. Arable land is moving north as remote regions thaw. Summers are hotter. (Before Orpo arrived for our interview, a spokeswoman for Finland’s U.N. mission told me that people in her hometown had begun putting bedsheets in the freezer.) Despite these challenges, Orpo wants to show that radical action is possible. Read the interview
Finland has among the most ambitious climate targets in the world. At the same time, you’re still consuming large quantities of oil, gas and even coal. What has the energy transition looked like for you? Today we produce more than 95 percent of our electricity carbon-neutral. We are going to change our whole society to use clean energy and get rid of fossils and to be carbon neutral. And we can do it. Our companies are committed. And our people, the whole of society, is committed to these targets.
What do you think when you see the U.S. pulling out of the Paris Agreement, penalizing renewable-energy production and doubling down on fossil fuels? We are looking very carefully at what is happening in the U.S.The withdrawal from Paris was a setback for global climate efforts, particularly in climate finance. For example, the American data economy is investing billions in data centers in Finland because of clean energy. I’m a bit worried about how U.S. policy affects the companies from the U.S. and their investment plans. But it is important to note that many private-sector companies have continued to advance climate action. And we have seen that China’s role in climate policy has become even more crucial. And the E.U. must work even harder. Climate and economy go hand in hand. We in Finland know this.
Is China becoming a more powerful partner to Finland with the retreat of the U.S. on clean energy? With China, we have to be careful. We have to get rid of dangerous dependencies, because we have to be autonomous in clean-energy production. China is investing a lot, and China is very good on that. That’s why we have to invest also in the West.
Do you feel like the effort to coordinate international climate action has ultimately been effective? I’m concerned at this moment, because we have so many troubles around the world. We have wars in Ukraine, the Middle East, in Africa. But at the same time, climate change is moving forward. And we have to act. I have seen that international cooperation is possible. When I worked as a minister of finance seven years ago, I was co-founder of the Coalition of Finance Ministers Against Climate Change. Today there are 100 countries on board. And the solution was carbon pricing. I think that is a good example — that if you have practical and good ideas, you can find the power between countries and coalitions.
‘With China, we have to be careful. We have to get rid of dangerous dependencies.’
When you talk to leaders from the developing world, they really believe that developed countries, including Finland, should pay for climate-related damage in their countries. What’s your response to this? It is understandable, of course, and it’s clear that we have to support developing countries that are facing the effects of climate change first. It’s daily life in their countries.
You’ve been working on this issue for many years now. What was the moment when you felt the most personal disillusionment about the politics around climate change? About five to 10 years ago, there was a debate in my own country over whether climate change is true or not. And because I believe it is, and I’m deeply worried about our world and our planet, that debate was frustrating. But we won. Today we have new technologies. We can change our behavior without cutting our welfare. We just have to believe that it’s possible, and we have to continue our work.
Bangladesh is among the most crowded countries in the world. With a young population packed into a low-lying delta, the country is facing acute challenges from rising sea levels and extreme heat. Agriculture is being disrupted. Populations are being displaced. Bangladesh is dealing with internal conflict, too. Last year, a popular uprising prompted the prime minister to flee to India, setting off a constitutional crisis. Days later, the country installed Muhammad Yunus as chief adviser. Yunus, an economist and entrepreneur, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006 for developing the concept of microfinance, or giving small loans to low-income people who lack access to traditional banks. He told me that he still looks to his experience with microfinance as an example of the way small individual actions can produce widespread change, and he believes that the same is possible with climate. Read the interview
How is Bangladesh experiencing climate change right now? We have to make use of every little space we’ve got in order to feed ourselves. But not only is our land sinking into the ocean; the water system brings saline water into the land because of the tide. And salinity eats up our cultivable land. So sum total is our land is getting squeezed. It’s not a very happy situation. It’s not going to change unless global warming changes. And then besides the sea level rising, our atmosphere is getting crazy. Our weather pattern is changing. Half of the population is under the age of 26. It’s a very young population. So they need a space to grow up and learn how to survive on this planet.
How much do you think international efforts to collaborate on climate action have succeeded or failed? We try to solve everything by pouring money into it. That’s not the solution. I’m saying I have to change myself. That’s how the world will change. I’m not undermining the importance of the COP [U.N. climate conference], because this is where everybody gets together and worries together. But the solution has to be something which is not just the government giving instruction. Government is not the solution. It’s the people who live on this planet who are the solution.
Bangladesh is a country that has almost no renewable-energy production at scale right now. You’ve talked about a zero-carbon-emissions world. How does a country like Bangladesh get there from where it is now? It’s not our fault. We try every way. Bangladesh doesn’t have its own source of hydropower. It’s a flat land, so we don’t have much except for solar. We have tremendous sources of hydropower up in the north, in Nepal, in Bhutan, and they are willing to supply this to Bangladesh. But for a time, we could not have the transmission line over India. So we got stuck. This is something that needs a decision which is beyond the control of Bangladesh.
‘We have to make use of every little space we’ve got in order to feed ourselves.’
Beyond India, what does the rest of the strategic landscape look like when it comes to energy issues? Is China potentially a partner for you as the U.S. pulls back? Well, you can imagine what the answer is, but being in the government, I cannot go on talking about other countries, what they should do and so on. It creates a problem for the government.
When you see the moves that the Trump administration has taken to reduce support for renewables, to prioritize fossil fuels, to cut federal funding for disaster response, what do you say? I just do the same thing I do for everybody. I’ll go to him and explain how I feel so bad that we are not taking the right kind of steps. And it can be done without hurting anybody. You have a choice, whether you take the path of self-destruction or you take the path of continuation and a decent life for all of us together. And not let the island people sink into the ocean. Not let Bangladesh be affected by sea level rising.
What do you think the developed countries that have historically been responsible for most global emissions owe a country like Bangladesh? All I can do is explain to them: “Look, this is our home. You start a fire in your part of the home, you suffer. But you do something to start a fire in my part of the house — this is not a fair thing to do. You are destroying the whole home. Our life depends on what you do.”
These interviews have been edited and condensed.
David Gelles is a correspondent on the Climate desk, where he leads the Climate Forward newsletter and event series. He is also the author of a new book, “Dirtbag Billionaire: How Yvon Chouinard Built Patagonia, Made a Fortune, and Gave It All Away.” Much of his reporting centers on how powerful interests — primarily wealthy individuals and corporations — are working to address the growing threats posed by climate change or stand in the way of efforts to reduce planet-warming emissions. Dina Litovsky is a Ukrainian-born photographer in New York. In her work for the magazine, she has photographed the Alpine ski racer Lindsey Vonn, the therapist Orna Guralnik and competitive cheerleaders.
Share full article
0
……Read full article on The New York Times-Science
World Environment Climate
One-stop lifestyle app dedicated to making life in Singapore a breeze!
English
简体中文
Comments
Leave a comment in Nestia App