The World Bank has clearly toned down its previously very explicit climate profile as the Donald Trump administration evaluates its support to international organizations and aims to reduce funding for various climate programs around the world.
However, according to sources within the department, this is a purely strategic adjustment to ensure continued US support, while the actual climate policy remains largely unchanged.
The Nordic Times reported that NATO is dropping its politically correct language and has removed or revised formulations relating to gender and climate – in an attempt to appease the conservative Trump administration.
And they are not alone in trying to adapt to reality and the new US administration – the World Bank and its top officials have also clearly changed their rhetoric since Trump became president.
World Bank President Ajay Banga has focused in recent months on labor issues and Republican-friendly energy sources such as nuclear power and natural gas, although he still believes that climate investment does not conflict with the Bank’s core mission of fighting poverty.
– Remember, we have a board which has representatives of all our shareholders and all these words and thinking go through their system, Banga said during a press conference ahead of the bank’s spring meetings in Washington.
“Do you want to scream this all loudly?”
He confirmed that 45% of the bank’s loans in 2025 will go to climate-related projects, but also emphasized a broader energy strategy than before.
– There is no reason why a country in Africa should not care about affordable, accessible electricity – and it includes gas, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, wind and nuclear where it makes sense.
According to former employees and current sources within the World Bank, the rhetoric is a trade-off to avoid conflict with the US, whose support is crucial. The Biden administration pledged $4 billion to the bank’s poverty-fighting work, but the sum must first be approved by a Republican-controlled Congress.
– Now, do you want to scream this all loudly? Probably not in this environment, said Samir Suleymanov, former head of the World Bank’s strategic initiatives.
A spokesperson for the bank, however, argued that the agenda has been consistent:
– For two years, we’ve been working to make the Bank faster, more efficient, and focused on creating jobs.
“Sort of a relief”
Trump allies have called on the US to leave the World Bank, arguing that it favors China and diverges from US interests. An investigation into US participation in international organizations is expected in August. However, a full withdrawal is considered unlikely, as it would open the door to China buying up US shares.
Karen Mathiasen, a former US representative at the Bank, notes a sharper tone compared to Trump’s first term:
– Now everything feels very hostile and adversarial.
But others welcome the rhetorical shift. Suleymanov argues that in the past, the focus on clean energy limited other emission-reducing projects.
– It may sound funny, but there is sort of a relief that this kind of pretend thing is over. The ideological underpinning took so much space. Everybody had the feeling they were caught in the game, like this is something that they have to do, but not necessarily with a clear practical outcome in mind.
It is worth noting that the World Bank’s sister organization, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), has also recently toned down its climate rhetoric – choosing instead to focus more on “trade growth and global challenges”. Here, too, it is said to be trying to maintain a good relationship with Trump and his inner circle.
