Current geopolitical tensions could be catastrophic for climate action, especially Africa's renewable energy transition.
Climate action, particularly the transition to renewables and low-carbon energy, is caught in the crossfire of the United States (US)-China geopolitical rivalry. This new cold war could accelerate global warming, with Africa potentially a victim - living out the old proverb, 'When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.'
Although China's President Xi Jinping reportedly suggested to US President Donald Trump in May that they bypass the Thucydides trap, which leads to unnecessary conflict, it seems unavoidable.
Multiple divisions are now at play. The US-China rift stemmed primarily from the 2021 US risk analysis, which identified China's ascent as the next big threat to US global dominance. This was echoed by the Pew Research Center's 2025 survey of Americans. While concerns initially focused on economic and military arenas, China's rise as a global political force has become more significant in the past two decades.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Newer rifts have also emerged, notably in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). These arise from a combination of NATO-based disagreements, the US' Greenland ambition, US-Europe differences over the Ukraine War, and US trade tariff attacks on the global economy. The most volatile divisions stem from the Gulf-US-Israel-Iran saga, which will likely affect regional and global power balances in the long term.
The impact of this discord on the pace of climate action could be catastrophic. This tale of two cities, Beijing and Washington, has characterised the global climate change narrative since the first United Nations (UN) COP meeting in 1995. While China has rapidly developed global leadership in energy transition from a quiet beginning, the US has been consistently vocal, either for or against climate action.
In 1998, the US under Bill Clinton signed the Kyoto Protocol, which committed industrialised nations to setting legally binding targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But the Byrd-Hagel Resolution ensured a 95-0 Senate vote against its ratification. Three years later, George W Bush enacted a formal withdrawal from the protocol. By contrast, China quietly ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002.
The two superpowers' approach to the Paris Agreement on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and limiting global warming follows a similar pattern. Barack Obama's administration was a key architect of the agreement, which it joined in 2015 with a national pledge to reduce US greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 26%-28% below 2005 levels by 2025.
The US withdrew from the agreement under the first Donald Trump administration. And in 2021, Joe Biden's administration rejoined with a pledge to decrease emissions by 50%-52% by 2030. In 2026, the second Trump administration again withdrew.
Meanwhile China's consistency continued. It joined the Paris Agreement, making it a central component of its energy and transport policy environment. This was accompanied by Nationally Determined Contribution pledges to lower carbon emissions per unit of gross domestic product by 60%-65%, with a carbon peak before 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060. The 2025 pledge was to cut all GHGs by 7%-10% by 2035.
In practice, this has meant different investment rates in the transition to low-carbon industrialisation in both countries. Their varying influence has also affected the global transition, creating two dilemmas for Africa's shift to a low-carbon industrialised economy, largely under the Just Energy Transition banner.
The first is political, as Africa is a major battleground for influence. While there are many players, like India, Turkey, Korea, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and others, the dominant contest for global influence in Africa is between the US and China.
Through the African Union (AU), countries need to plot a delicate diplomatic pathway to maximise benefit from the rivalry while avoiding falling out with sensitive players. The challenge is to maintain a positive climate-action policy environment while navigating the US' anti-climate stance.
The second is an economic dilemma. Africa wants higher energy security to deal with its energy poverty, achieve universal energy access, and realise its developmental and industrial ambitions as expressed in the AU's Agenda 2063.
When both the US and China sought global leadership in clean energy, Africa was a prominent beneficiary of their race for influence on the continent. But since the US' stance against climate action, fossil fuel-based development has gained momentum, slowing Africa's pathway to low-carbon development.
The 2025 China-Global South Project report shows that between 2020 and 2024, China invested US$33 billion in projects in 30 African countries, delivering 32 GW of energy - primarily renewable. Of the 84 projects, 35 were in Southern Africa, 22 in West Africa, 16 in East Africa, six in Central Africa and five in North Africa.
The US was also a major player in this domain. Obama launched Power Africa with a US$1 billion investment in 2013, leveraging US$29 billion from other players, funding 150 projects that delivered 15.5 GW of electricity and reached 219 million Africans, while facilitating the participation of over 100 companies.
This looked promising - a race between elephants that would help the grass to grow for a change. But the second Trump administration's dismantling of the US Agency for International Development ended Power Africa. Fortunately, the US withdrawal from Power Africa and the Just Energy Transition (JET) Partnership in South Africa has not affected other JET partners.
Whether the US will again switch back to a positive climate action stance if a Democrat returns to the White House is harder to predict than before.
Africa has made strides with its renewable energy build. The International Renewable Energy Agency makes the case for Africa leapfrogging the fossil fuel energy paradigm into renewable energy dominance. This could help avoid a climate catastrophe as Africa's energy needs grow exponentially. But partnerships remain key, and achieving success will test Africa's climate diplomacy acumen to the extreme.
For permission to re-publish ISS Today articles, please email us. In South Africa, News24 has exclusive rights to republish ISS Today articles. In Nigeria, Premium Times has exclusive rights to republish ISS Today articles.
Dhesigen Naidoo, Research Associate, Climate Risk and Human Security Project, ISS Pretoria
Facts Only
* Geopolitical tensions could be catastrophic for climate action, especially Africa's renewable energy transition.
* The US-China rivalry is impacting the transition to renewables and low-carbon energy.
* China suggested bypassing the Thucydides trap with the US in May.
* The US-China rift stemmed from the 2021 US risk analysis identifying China's ascent as a threat to US global dominance.
* Rifts have emerged in NATO due to disagreements, Greenland ambition, US-Europe differences over the Ukraine War, and US trade tariff attacks.
* The Gulf-US-Israel-Iran saga is identified as volatile for regional and global power balances.
* The US signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1998, which was later withdrawn by the US under George W. Bush.
* China quietly ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002.
* The US withdrew from the Paris Agreement under the first Donald Trump administration.
* Joe Biden's administration rejoined the Paris Agreement in 2021.
* China pledged to lower carbon emissions per unit of GDP by 60%-65%, achieve a carbon peak before 2030, and carbon neutrality by 2060.
* China invested US$33 billion in projects in 30 African countries between 2020 and 2024, delivering 32 GW of energy primarily renewable.
* The US launched Power Africa with a US$1 billion investment in 2013, funding 150 projects delivering 15.5 GW of electricity.
* The US withdrawal from the US Agency for International Development ended Power Africa.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The narrative highlights a fundamental tension between geopolitical competition and existential global challenges like climate change. The conflict between the US and China is not merely an economic or military contest; it is explicitly framed as a determinant of climate policy, suggesting that great power rivalry imposes constraints on cooperative action necessary for mitigating global warming. This dynamic creates specific structural dilemmas for regions like Africa, which are positioned as both potential beneficiaries of competitive investment and vulnerable to being caught in the fallout.
The pattern observed involves a contest over leadership in green energy transition, where historical agreements and current political shifts—such as US policy volatility—are weaponized or leveraged by competing interests. The movement away from unified global climate governance toward competing national approaches demonstrates how strategic rivalry can fragment collective action, especially when development goals (energy access, industrial ambition) intersect with environmental necessity. The experience of Africa underscores that while external actors compete for influence on the continent, their competitive engagement ultimately shapes the pathways available for self-determined developmental trajectories.
The implication is that climate resilience in regions like Africa is not solely determined by technological capacity or internal policy choices, but by navigating an increasingly fractured international order. The challenge for African diplomacy lies in establishing sovereign pathways that maximize external engagement without being subservient to the competing power blocs, turning the pursuit of energy security into a sophisticated act of climate sovereignty.
Bridge Questions: How can regional bodies effectively design multilateral frameworks that incentivize climate action irrespective of great power competition? What mechanisms exist to ensure that development-focused investments are decoupled from geopolitical maneuvering in the context of climate finance? If climate outcomes depend on internal political alignment, what strategies can be employed to foster resilient, independent climate governance structures within regions facing external pressures?
Sentinel — Human
The text is a well-structured geopolitical analysis that synthesizes historical climate agreements, superpower rivalry, and African energy transitions, displaying characteristics of experienced journalistic synthesis.