U.S. Will Stick With the IMO, But Aims to Defeat the Net Zero Framework
The United States appears committed to staying with the International Maritime Organization and attempting to win arguments on the inside, in contrast to its decision to withdraw entirely from some other international organizations - such as the World Health Organization - that it considers lost causes.
This was apparent from the attendance last week of Marco Sylvester, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Affairs, at the 16th Annual Capital Link Greek Shipping Forum held in Athens, and his participation in a Ministerial Roundtable on February 5. But he also warned that the future of the IMO was threatened if IMO Council decisions were adopted without "explicit acceptance," the IMO’s procedure for only adopting proposals with a clear majority.
The focus of attention at the meeting in Athens was on how to proceed after the IMO’s draft Net Zero Framework (NZF) failed to secure the necessary support for adoption, with members voting instead for an adjournment to rework the framework and present it afresh. The IMO’s Marine Environmental Protection Committee will consider how to proceed once again at its MEPC 84 session scheduled for April 2026.
In the run-up to the vote on October 17 last year, the United States, Russia, the United Arab Emirates, Liberia, and Saudi Arabia were amongst those opposed to the adoption of the NZF. China, the European Union, Brazil, and the United Kingdom were openly in favor, but Cyprus, Greece, and Malta threatened to break the European 27-strong bloc vote by voting against or abstaining.
In broad terms, those in favor of the NZF are those ideologically committed to making progress on net zero matters, along with nations particularly impacted by shipping-generated pollution and emissions. Anyone flying into Changi Airport and seeing the smog hanging over the Singapore Anchorage can see how port cities in particular are affected.
that matters most
Get the latest maritime news delivered to your inbox daily.
Those opposed to the NZF say there is no infrastructure in place to make sure that revenue raised by taxing ‘dirty’ ships will be beneficially spent, and that in effect a tax will be levied on shippers but not on those who benefit from shipping services. These opponents instead seek to incentivize the shipping community to program its own emissions improvements.
The negotiations that preceded the October 17 NZF vote were unusually acrimonious for IMO, an organization which has in the past managed to develop well-founded consensus on contentious issues - the benefit being that implementation is broadly supported by the international maritime community. From the debate at the 16th Annual Capital Link Greek Shipping Forum in Athens, it appears that attitudes towards the NZF are still heavily polarized.
Content Original Link:
" target="_blank">
