The United States has issued a stark warning to members of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), threatening visa restrictions and sanctions against countries that support a proposed UN-backed framework to cut greenhouse gas emissions from global shipping — one of the world’s most polluting industries.
The vote, scheduled for this week at the IMO headquarters in London, aims to approve a “net-zero emissions” roadmap for the maritime sector — a sector responsible for nearly 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions and the transport of around 80% of world trade.
While the initiative has been hailed by environmental groups and climate-focused investors as a long-overdue step toward decarbonizing ocean transport, Washington’s response marks a sharp political backlash against global climate regulation.
In a joint statement, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the U.S. government “categorically rejects” the IMO proposal and “will not tolerate any measure that increases costs for American citizens, energy providers, shipping companies, their clients, or tourists.”
The statement signals a deepening rift between the U.S. and international climate governance bodies, echoing the country’s broader deregulatory stance under current leadership.
A Showdown Between Climate Policy and Economic Nationalism
Supporters of the IMO proposal argue that without a coordinated global framework, the shipping sector will face a chaotic patchwork of regional rules and rising costs — without meaningfully reducing emissions.
But several major oil tanker companies have voiced “serious concerns” about the plan, warning that it could impose uneven financial burdens on carriers and increase shipping costs worldwide.
The U.S. administration, however, went further than criticism. It threatened “countermeasures” against states voting in favor of the framework — including the possible exclusion of their flagged vessels from U.S. ports, visa restrictions, and sanctions targeting officials who ‘promote activist-driven climate policies.’
The dispute underscores a growing struggle over who will define the pace and rules of global decarbonization. As international agencies push for stronger climate commitments, nationalist and industry-backed governments are pushing back, portraying such regulations as economic threats rather than ecological imperatives.
Critics say Washington’s threats risk undermining multilateral climate governance at a time when coordinated action is most needed. The maritime sector — long viewed as one of the hardest to decarbonize — cannot transition effectively without a shared global standard, they argue.
In the coming days, the outcome of the IMO vote will reveal whether the global shipping industry can withstand political pressure from powerful nations — or whether short-term national interests will once again override collective climate action.
Comment