Nearly 60 countries will gather in Santa Marta, Colombia, to confront the fossil fuel era head-on — and the United States, once central to global climate diplomacy, will sit this one out.

The meeting marks a sharp geopolitical signal. Reports indicate governments plan to focus on phasing out fossil fuels, a goal that has long exposed deep fractures between climate ambition and energy politics. This time, organizers are excluding the Trump administration altogether, underscoring just how far Washington has moved from many of its peers on climate strategy.

The Santa Marta gathering does more than leave out one country; it spotlights a widening divide over whether the energy transition counts as an economic threat or a global necessity.

The White House has made its position plain. A spokeswoman described the green transition as “destructive,” framing the administration’s stance in direct opposition to efforts that many other governments now treat as urgent. That rhetoric matters because it does more than signal disagreement. It raises the odds of a more fragmented international approach, with blocs of countries pushing ahead even as one of the world’s largest economies resists.

Key Facts

  • About 60 countries are expected to meet in Santa Marta, Colombia.
  • The gathering will focus on phasing out fossil fuels, according to reports.
  • The Trump administration was not invited to participate.
  • A White House spokeswoman called the green transition “destructive.”

The exclusion also carries symbolic weight. Climate summits often aim for broad participation, even when consensus proves elusive. Leaving out the U.S. suggests some countries may now see more value in building momentum among willing partners than in negotiating around a major holdout. Sources suggest that approach could help produce clearer commitments, though it also risks limiting the reach of any agreement.

What happens next will show whether this meeting can convert diplomatic theater into real pressure. If participating countries align around a stronger anti-fossil-fuel agenda, they could shape future climate talks and deepen the sense that the global transition will move forward with or without Washington. That matters not just for emissions targets, but for investment, trade, and the political map of the energy economy.