U.S. Threatens Retaliation against Int’l Maritime Org members Agreeing to “Net Zero” Plan
Meanwhile, representatives of the U.S. and China trade accusations over each other’s behavior as it relates to maritime security at the United Nations Security Council meeting.
In April, I reported that the Trump administration withdrew from the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) negotiations on decarbonization. This green-grifting plan would have gutted American shipping with tariffs related to achieving “Net-Zero”, a goal based on neither science nor reason.
Since that time, the administration has taken an even more robust reaction to extract the U.S. from green grifting policies. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) just pulled the “Endangerment Finding” from the federal policy mix. The Department of Energy (DOE) expedited a new Climate Assessment, which balanced climate change realities with reasonable and achievable energy goals. The Department of the Interior just ended green energy favoritism.
One of the most critical differences in the second term of President Donald Trump from his first term is that his entire team is working together in harmony toward hitting their America First targets, which leads me to the announcement that our government has formally rejected the IMO Net-Zero Framework.
In a joint statement that included not only Secretary of State Marco Rubio, but also Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, the administration called the proposal a “global carbon tax” that would raise costs for Americans.
Under the direction of @POTUS, we’re not going to let a woke climate agenda hurt our economy, disrupt supply chains, and benefit our foreign adversaries.
Proud to stand together with @SecRubio, Secretary @howardlutnick, and @SecretaryWright. America, we’ve got your back! https://t.co/SoCNzg7ulU
— Secretary Sean Duffy (@SecDuffy) August 12, 2025
The announcement also indicated there would be retaliation or remedies against countries that support this toxic framework.
Whatever its stated goals, the proposed framework is effectively a global carbon tax on Americans levied by an unaccountable UN organization. These fuel standards would conveniently benefit China by requiring the use of expensive fuels unavailable at global scale. These standards would also preclude the use of proven technologies that fuel global shipping fleets, including lower emissions options where U.S. industry leads such as liquified natural gas (LNG) and biofuels.
Under this framework, ships will have to pay fees for failing to meet unattainable fuel standards and emissions targets. These fees will drive up energy and transportation and leisure cruise costs. Even small vessels would incur millions of dollars in fees, directly driving up costs for American consumers.
The Trump Administration unequivocally rejects this proposal before the IMO and will not tolerate any action that increases costs for our citizens, energy providers, shipping companies and their customers, or tourists. We will fight hard to protect the American people and their economic interests.
Our fellow IMO members should be on notice that we will look for their support against this action and not hesitate to retaliate or explore remedies for our citizens should this endeavor fail.
The American move may give many countries a reason to exit, after mindlessly following the globalists in this international organization off the “Net-Zero” cliff.
Member states of the IMO agreed on the net-zero framework in April following a vote that required a simple majority, 63 member states including China, Brazil and EU countries voted in favour, while only 16 states voted against.
In October, a vote would require a two-thirds majority of 108 member states that ratified the key legislation aiming to reduce shipping pollution. IMO only resorts to voting if there is no agreement on a regulation among member states.
Ocean vessels transport around 80% of world trade and account for nearly 3% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. The industry is under pressure from environmentalists and investors to deliver more concrete climate action, including a carbon levy.
Many large ocean shipping companies already have committed to net-zero operations by 2050.
One last point: Scratch the surface of any globalist policy that is directed to hurt the U.S., and you will find China. Interestingly, just this year, China formalized its growing presence at the IMO by establishing a Permanent Mission, giving it greater leverage on policy and regulatory matters.
But don’t take my word for it. Even the London based Lloyds List is warning of China’s growing influence @IMOHQ https://t.co/5STeWTFiRm’s-influence-within-the-IMO-is-growing
— John Ʌ Konrad V (@johnkonrad) August 12, 2025
Meanwhile, representatives of the U.S. and China trade accusations over each other’s behavior regarding maritime security at the United Nations Security Council meeting. During the exchange, Acting U.S. Representative Dorothy Shea spent some time covering China’s antics related to the Panama Canal.
While saying the U.S. supports Panama, Shea told the members, “The United States, however, remains concerned about China’s outsized influence over the Panama Canal area, especially over critical infrastructure and port operations… China’s influence in the canal area is not just a risk to Panama and the United States, but rather a potential threat to global trade and security.”
Shea also asserted that “China’s expansive and unlawful maritime claims and aggressive actions demonstrate its threat to maritime security.”
Personally, I can’t wait until Tammy Bruce arrives as our Deputy Representative.
Tapping the sign…again. pic.twitter.com/Af2SPa1bz0
— Leslie Eastman ☥ (@Mutnodjmet) August 13, 2025
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Ponder that if vile, dim-witted, incompetent and useless crone-harlot-dunce, Kamuluh had been elected, she and her lackeys across all federal agencies and departments would be supporting this prosperity-destroying and job-destroying “green” fanaticism and lunacy.
Instead, we have a president and cabinet who are staunchly standing up for the U.S.’s sovereignty and economic interests.
Also, the malignancy and malicious designs of the Chinese communist regime cannot be overstated, as referenced in the post.
The Chicoms know that they can play European leftists and American Dhimmi-crats like a fiddle by talking up a bunch of insincere “green”/”climate change” proposals/schemes, which naturally the Chinese regime reject for its own use and which schemes are transparently intended as mechanisms to sabotage and hinder the economic growth and prosperity of the U.S, and Europe.
I was just in Eastern Africa, China is everywhere, building roads, buildings as these stupid African countries take out loans China is betting they can’t repay
China will not only own all the mineral rights in these countries tries, but their very Countries
Mark my word
You refer to the utterly pernicious and exploitative “Belt and Road” initiative. China has also sold this program in central America and elsewhere. It is indeed amazing how gullible these countries are, not understanding the disastrous implications of getting into bed with the cunning and self-serving Chicoms.
What country?
You are back to your impressive linguistic stride!
LOL; thanks. I thought I never broke it. 🙂
China and India have ZERO intention of even PRETENDING to abide by these insane ‘net zero’ plans.
It’s just a way to cripple stupid Westerners.
It’s about time. Better now than at the precipice of “the “Net-Zero” cliff.”
Another day, another climate grift.
Gonna be tough for these international goons to enforce all these maritime agreements without a flipping Navy. Be a shame if they went ahead and tried but then non US flagged vessels were suddenly disappearing at sea. Gotta be mindful of ‘pirates’, they might just have a resurgence when least expected.
There’s a simple way to get to actual zero carbon shipping rather than “net zero” shipping: nuclear marine propulsion. But no, let’s destroy another industry and achieve nothing positive.
Or even simpler….restore domestic US Manufacturing. Making things here means no international shipping for those products, no supply chain issues from ‘incidents’ that block a foreign port or the Suez Canal. No meaningful threat of supply disruption for finished goods. The few basic materials, rare earth and so on which we must import from other continents b/c we don’t have them here to dig out and can’t source from Canada can be sent by convoy protected by the US Navy.