Vanuatu is locked in a diplomatic battle of wills with the United States, the world’s largest superpower, over a draft United Nations General Assembly resolution that would further strengthen a landmark climate justice ruling last year. The determination of this tiny Pacific Island state demonstrates the power of small-state diplomacy.

The proposed resolution is a stress test of U.S. influence in multilateral institutions at a moment of acute climate vulnerability and geopolitical fragmentation. Many countries are bending to President Donald Trump’s will as he seeks to reverse hard-won gains on climate action. But Vanuatu, a nation with an economy amounting to just 0.004 percent of the United States’, is holding firm because it has to. For small, climate-vulnerable states, climate change is not a bargaining chip but an existential priority. Their governments will withstand diplomatic pressure because they have no other option.

In July 2025, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave its Advisory Opinion that states could be in violation of international law if they fail to take sufficient climate action. The ICJ also advised that harmed states may be entitled to reparations. 

Vanuatu had championed this initiative from the start. After a successful diplomatic campaign, the U.N. General Assembly adopted resolution 77/276 in March 2023 formally requesting the opinion of the ICJ. That led to the landmark ruling last year. Vanuatu and partners are now seeking a General Assembly resolution to operationalize the ICJ’s ruling, with the hope it will be adopted on April 22, 2026  – Earth Day. 

The ruling itself was clear that states have obligations to act on climate change under international law, and that a breach of these obligations has legal consequences and might include reparations. The ruling has already strengthened avenues for domestic legal cases, as can be seen in the small island of Bonaire’s recent victory in Dutch courts. The Advisory Opinion lacks detail, however, on how the rights and obligations will be taken forward, and a resolution from the General Assembly can help clarify important avenues for implementation. 

But the Trump administration “strongly objects” to the proposal, which Washington argues “could pose a major threat to U.S. industry.” The United States government is pressuring Vanuatu and its supporters to drop the draft resolution.

Undeterred, Vanuatu shared a second draft with U.N. members last week. The newest draft calls on states to ramp up their climate commitments – including through the phase out of fossil fuels, protection of forests and other carbon sinks, and critically, by paying full and prompt reparations if they fail to enact sufficient climate action. 

One of the most controversial aspects of the first draft, the establishment of an International Register of Damage to track climate change losses, has been significantly watered down as a compromise. Rather than establishing the Register as originally drafted, the resolution now calls for options and proposals to be presented to the next session of the U.N. General Assembly, which opens in September. 

Another sticking point in the draft text is the call to scale up finance for loss and damage, at a time when many Western countries are slashing their aid budgets. 

Vanuatu’s bold stance may look risky, but it is well-positioned to be a thorn in the side of the far more powerful United States in climate diplomacy. Less than 1 percent of Vanuatu’s imports come from the U.S., while the country only sends around 4.5 percent of annual exports to the U.S., reducing the potential sting of new tariffs or a trade embargo. On aid, the United States accounted for only 2 percent of Official Development Assistance (ODA) to Vanuatu in 2023. This was cut even further with the shutdown of USAID in 2025.

Vanuatu was already threatened with a U.S. travel ban mid-2025, along with two other Pacific nations; however, these are yet to be enacted. Only 300 Vanuatu nationals travel to the U.S. every year, so the impacts of potential travel bans are not expansive. While Vanuatu is heavily reliant on tourism income, the U.S. only accounts for around 3 percent of tourists entering the country. 

Vanuatu’s independence from U.S. influence is not unique. A recent survey of Small Island Developing States’ (SIDS) preferred development partners ranked the United States below China, Japan, and Australia across all SIDS. This reflects growing frustration over the country’s lack of reliable support, coupled with the harm it is doing in blocking domestic and  international action on climate change.

SIDS, while small in military power and economically vulnerable to shocks, are uniquely positioned to stand up to diplomatic pressure. Together, they command 20 percent of votes at the U.N. and some in geopolitically strategic locations. With so much at stake, bullying tactics are no longer enough to prevent climate action. 

If Vanuatu quietly withdrew the resolution tomorrow, the global order would not shift. But if small states begin to show that U.S. pressure does not successfully deter multilateral climate action, that matters. It would signal that the calculus of power inside the U.N. system is evolving – and that even the most powerful governments cannot as readily block efforts to convert climate law into collective action.