Bannon’s dark language wins president’s ear in White House battle over environment
THE debate over climate change exposed the deep divisions inside Donald Trump’s White House.
It pitted isolationists against globalists, conservatives against moderates, populists against gradualists, outsiders against family. Both sides battled for the president’s ear.
Last night it became clear who had won. The dark language of Mr Trump’s speech, his talk of “draconian burdens” and “economic wounds”, came straight from the playbook of Steve Bannon, White House chief strategist, and Stephen Miller, his sidekick in economic nationalism.
Along with hardline conservatives they argued that the US targets set by Barack Obama’s administration on emissions would be bad for manufacturing jobs – a key constituency for Mr Trump.
For the proponents of economic nationalism, ditching an international accord that stifles economic growth plays to a narrative of American boldness.
Along with Scott Pruitt, the climate change sceptic who runs the Environmental Protection Agency, they made sure that a steady stream of conservative opponents of the deal made their way into the Oval Office for meetings.
Arrayed against them was a powerful lobby warning of the dangers of climate change, from Silicon Valley billionaires, the Pope and secretary of state Rex Tillerson, to the president’s daughter Ivanka and her husband,
Jared Kushner.
Ms Trump, in particular, hoped her father would be swayed by a business community which backs the Paris agreement and generally prefers stability to unilateral decision-making. Along with her husband, she has been seen as a moderating influence on Mr Trump’s more reckless instincts.
For his part, Mr Tillerson, the former head of Exxonmobil, stressed how leaving the agreement would weaken America’s reputation as a global leader and risked ceding ground to China’s ambitions.
They won a concession in the form of a promise to try renegotiating a deal but make no mistake this was a victory for the economic nationslists.