The US has quit the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) initiative it helped launch to support several developing countries in their shift away from coal to clean energy, ending its contribution to the $45 billion in climate finance pledged to back their efforts.
The withdrawal is the latest in a rapid-fire series of US funding cuts for work in developing countries after President Donald Trump, a climate change sceptic, came to power in late January. His right-wing administration has since given notice that the US will leave the Paris Agreement, rescinded pledges of $4 billion to the Green Climate Fund, and given up the US seat on the loss and damage fund board.
The JETP initiative was launched in 2021 to great fanfare, with South Africa signing the first deal with the International Partners Group (IPG) – including the European Union, Germany, the UK, France and the US – at the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow.
The group pledged to mobilise an initial $8.5 billion between 2023 and 2027, a total that increased by several billion dollars as the Netherlands and Denmark joined. In 2022, Indonesia negotiated a JETP deal with a $20-billion commitment from the IPG, including $10 billion from commercial investors, followed by Vietnam with $15 billion.
Trump’s aid cuts make Malawians more vulnerable to climate change
Last week, the US wrote letters to those three recipient countries – Indonesia, Vietnam and South Africa – informing them of its decision to withdraw funding as part of the IPG, a coalition of donor countries and financial institutions providing funding and other technical support to the deal.
A fourth JETP was agreed with Senegal, but the US was not part of that from the beginning.
Germany described the US decision to exit as “regrettable”. However, German Development State Secretary Jochen Flasbarth said his government is convinced the work of the JETPs “can be continued successfully”.
As Climate Home News reported last year, Germany and the UK disclosed at the COP29 climate summit last year that they were hesitant to pursue additional JETPs and set out the lessons learned so far.
Why rich countries are “reluctant” on additional JETP coal-to-clean deals
But in his statement on the US withdrawal, Flasbarth said the partnerships “have grown”, adding that “the decision to share responsibility between so many partners is now turning out to be very helpful”.
He added that while public funding plays an important role in the JETPs, the mobilisation of private investment “is far more important”. The partnership has been working on the “conducive environment and reliable regulations” to stimulate such investment flows, he noted.
In South Africa, for example, energy legislation reforms laid the foundation for “a market-led boom in renewable energy”, Flasbarth said, meaning that renewables are now mostly cheaper than fossil fuels.
UK climate envoy Rachel Kyte said in South Africa this week that while the US exit is “regrettable”, she believes there is a “clear path forward”, in comments reported by the Financial Times.
Kyte went on to announce additional funding support for South Africa’s JETP to help prepare the country’s wholesale electricity market and explore interim transmission solutions.
‘Dangerous precedent’
While the IPG plans to move on without the US, environmental group 350.org said the US remains morally bound to deliver on its financial obligations to developing countries, adding that the exit is “deeply concerning” for the future of the planet and communities dealing with escalating climate chaos.
“Big polluters like the United States are financially obligated to support climate-vulnerable nations,” said Norly Mercado, Asia regional director at 350.org. Mercado said the US exit sets a “dangerous precedent” and signals to the rest of the world that the second-biggest emitter of planet-heating gases will no longer be accountable for its climate obligations.
Mercado added that the JETP withdrawal by the world’s richest country should not serve as an excuse for developing countries to roll back their commitments to phase out coal and urged them to accelerate the adoption of cleaner renewable energy sources.
Oil giant Pemex fails to control methane emissions, threatening Mexico’s net zero goal
Joanne Yawitch, head of South Africa’s Presidential Just Energy Transition Project Management Unit, said in a statement on Thursday, that the government remains “steadfast in its commitment to achieving a just and equitable energy transition”. She added that the country will seek alternative funding, while other partners in the IPG remain “firmly committed to supporting South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Investment Plan” .
The US pledge to South Africa included grant funding of $56 million and $1 billion in commercial investments, which the JETP unit said did not amount to a significant reduction from the total investment of $13.8 billion.
Thandolwethu Lukuko, Climate Action Network’s director for South Africa, said South Africa had not relied heavily on aid from the US for its JETP – which accounted for about 10% of the initial investment – and could proceed without it, with other partners able to fill the space left by the US.
But, he warned, broader climate policy changes and funding cuts by the US to mechanisms like the Green Climate Fund are “more worrisome” and could affect other countries’ ability to meet their climate goals.
The post US withdraws from coal-to-clean JETP deals for developing nations appeared first on Climate Home News.
US withdraws from coal-to-clean JETP deals for developing nations
The case shows that climate change is a fundamental human rights violation—and the victory of Bonaire, a Dutch territory, could open the door for similar lawsuits globally.
From our collaborating partner Living on Earth, public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by Paloma Beltran with Greenpeace Netherlands campaigner Eefje de Kroon.
A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won
Climate Change
Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit
SYDNEY, Saturday 28 February 2026 — Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US announce they will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court following a North Dakota District Court judgment today awarding Energy Transfer (ET) USD $345 million.
ET’s SLAPP suit remains a blatant attempt to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Greenpeace International will also continue to seek damages for ET’s bullying lawsuits under EU anti-SLAPP legislation in the Netherlands.
Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International Executive Director said: “Energy Transfer’s attempts to silence us are failing. Greenpeace International will continue to resist intimidation tactics. We will not be silenced. We will only get louder, joining our voices to those of our allies all around the world against the corporate polluters and billionaire oligarchs who prioritise profits over people and the planet.
“With hard-won freedoms under threat and the climate crisis accelerating, the stakes of this legal fight couldn’t be higher. Through appeals in the US and Greenpeace International’s groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, we are exploring every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for multiple abusive lawsuits and show all power-hungry bullies that their attacks will only result in a stronger people-powered movement.”
The Court’s final judgment today rejects some of the jury verdict delivered in March 2025, but still awards hundreds of millions of dollars to ET without a sound basis in law. The Greenpeace defendants will continue to press their arguments that the US Constitution does not allow liability here, that ET did not present evidence to support its claims, that the Court admitted inflammatory and irrelevant evidence at trial and excluded other evidence supporting the defense, and that the jury pool in Mandan could not be impartial.[1][2]
ET’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the US organisations Greenpeace USA (Greenpeace Inc.) and Greenpeace Fund are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent.[3] Greenpeace International, which is based in the Netherlands, is pursuing justice in Europe, with a suit against ET under Dutch law and the European Union’s new anti-SLAPP directive, a landmark test of the new legislation which could help set a powerful precedent against corporate bullying.[4]
Kate Smolski, Program Director at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This is part of a worrying trend globally: fossil fuel corporations are increasingly using litigation to attack and silence ordinary people and groups using the law to challenge their polluting operations — and we’re not immune to these tactics here in Australia.
“Rulings like this have a chilling effect on democracy and public interest litigation — we must unite against these silencing tactics as bad for Australians and bad for our democracy. Our movement is stronger than any corporate bully, and grows even stronger when under attack.”
Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years.[3] A couple of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024.
-ENDS-
Images available in Greenpeace Media Library
Notes:
[1] The judgment entered by North Dakota District Court Judge Gion follows a jury verdict finding Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million on March 19, 2025. Judge Gion subsequently threw out several items from the jury’s verdict, reducing the total damages to approximately US$345 million.
[2] Public statements from the independent Trial Monitoring Committee
[3] Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.
[4] Greenpeace International sent a Notice of Liability to Energy Transfer on 23 July 2024, informing the pipeline giant of Greenpeace International’s intention to bring an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against the company in a Dutch Court. After Energy Transfer declined to accept liability on multiple occasions (September 2024, December 2024), Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive on 11 February 2025 by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. The case was officially registered in the docket of the Court of Amsterdam on 2 July, 2025. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, abusive lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. The next hearing in the Court of Amsterdam is scheduled for 16 April, 2026.
Media contact:
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
The Trump administration’s relentless rollback of public health and environmental protections has allowed widespread toxic exposures to flourish, warn experts who helped implement safeguards now under assault.
In a new report that outlines a dozen high-risk pollutants given new life thanks to weakened, delayed or rescinded regulations, the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group of hundreds of former Environmental Protection Agency staff, warns that the EPA under President Donald Trump has abandoned the agency’s core mission of protecting people and the environment from preventable toxic exposures.
Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump
A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won
Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit
Renewable Energy Concepts Can’t Violate the Laws of Physics
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits