Live

It was supposed to be one of the most important sessions in the history of global climate policy. At the headquarters of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in London, diplomats from around the world were expected to adopt the so-called Net Zero Framework — a plan introducing a carbon levy on commercial ships. Instead of an agreement, however, the world witnessed something entirely different: open confrontation, threats, and pressure not seen in that building for decades.

According to accounts from several diplomats and observers, representatives of Donald Trump’s administration resorted to unprecedented methods to block the initiative supported by Europe. The tactics reportedly included not only trade threats but also personal ultimatums directed at individual negotiators.

“Our negotiators have never experienced anything like this in any international talks before,” said one European official.

Threats Over Coffee and Ultimatums Across the Atlantic

During informal conversations in the breaks between plenary sessions, American envoys allegedly warned delegates from African, Asian, and Pacific countries that supporting the European proposal could have “concrete consequences.”

Witnesses report that U.S. representatives hinted diplomats and their families could lose entry visas, and that countries voting “against Washington’s wishes” would face tariffs or port fees.

“It was like dealing with the mafia,” recalled one participant, quoted by the Financial Times. “It’s a bully’s tactic. They don’t have to tell you exactly what they’ll do — it’s enough to make it clear you’ll pay the price.”

Some European negotiators were even summoned to the U.S. embassy in London, where they reportedly heard that if they didn’t change their position, “businesses could suffer, and families might face visa problems.” For EU diplomats — used to long but predictable technical discussions — it was a shock.

Trump vs. the Climate

From the start of his term, Trump has been skeptical of climate initiatives. He called the plan to introduce a global emissions tax on shipping a “green scam” and “another UN bureaucrats’ attack on American industry.” He publicly vowed he would “not let American shipowners pay for other people’s ideologies.”

In practice, this meant an effort to break Europe’s united front of support for the reform. The attempt was only partially successful — at the last minute, two countries, Greece and Cyprus, broke ranks with Brussels. Athens, which has one of the world’s largest merchant fleets, later claimed its decision was made “independently of American pressure.”

Still, the result was clear: the vote ended with the decision being postponed for a year — which many observers saw as the de facto burial of the entire initiative.

A New Style of Diplomacy — Same Old Goal

Behind closed doors, diplomats say this aggressive style of negotiation was not an incident but a deliberate element of Trump’s strategy.

“In the very short term it may work, but in the medium term it increases the risk that countries outside the U.S. will conclude they can’t cooperate with Washington and will start making independent agreements that simply won’t include the U.S.,” said Creon Butler, head of global economy at Chatham House.

European officials see this as a dangerous precedent and a threat to the entire postwar order created by the U.S. and the UN.

“When you threaten countries, you undermine the very essence and functioning of multilateralism that was born after World War II,” added Christiaan De Beukelaer, senior lecturer on climate policy and maritime transport at the University of Melbourne.

Domino Effect in Transatlantic Relations

In Brussels, the mood is mixed: on one hand, there’s reluctance to escalate tensions with Washington; on the other, a recognition that silence means accepting a new norm. The European Commission is reportedly analyzing how to protect its negotiators and ensure their safety in upcoming rounds of climate talks.

Meanwhile, the IMO remains deadlocked. Technical work on the Net Zero Framework continues on paper, but even participants admit that as long as Trump remains in the White House, real progress is unlikely.

The London crisis at the IMO is more than just a dispute over a carbon tax. It’s a test for the future of the global order — whether the world is still capable of acting collectively against threats that know no borders.

For now, it seems that climate has lost to geopolitics, and intimidation has triumphed over diplomacy. In the 21st century, the green transition may turn out to be not just a matter of technology — but of courage.

Written by

Shape the conversation

Do you have anything to add to this story? Any ideas for interviews or angles we should explore? Let us know if you’d like to write a follow-up, a counterpoint, or share a similar story.

Write a counterargument article Write a related article