The Trump administration has renegotiated to reduce the trade deficit between the United States and Mexico. The new agreement amends NAFTA in six important areas. The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked the end of a long period of international history based on a policy of balance of forces. Since this historic event, the planet has entered a phase of geostrategic collapse. The national security model, for example, which still exists for most governments, is gradually giving way to a collective consciousness that is emerging and goes beyond the limited framework it represents.  Global governance is not a global government, let alone democratic globalization. In fact, global governance would not be necessary if there was a world government. National governments have monopolies over the use of force – the power to impose it. Global governance refers to the political interaction needed to solve problems that affect more than one state or region, when there is no compliance enforcement power.
Problems arise and networks of actors deal with them when there is no international analogy with a national government. This system has been described as discredited sovereignty. Global governance or global governance is a movement of political cooperation between transnational actors that aims to negotiate responses to problems that affect more than one state or region. Global governance institutions – the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, the World Bank, etc. – generally have limited or limited power to enforce the rules. Global governance encompasses several states and international organizations, a state playing a more important leading role than the rest. The modern question of global governance exists in the context of globalization and the globalization of power regimes: political, economic and cultural. In response to the acceleration of global interdependence, both between human societies and between humanity and the biosphere, the concept of “global governance” may refer to the process of designating laws, rules or regulations at a global level. There are international environmental organizations.
Established in 1972, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) coordinates the environmental activities of non-member countries. UNEP and other similar environmental organizations are not considered to be up to the task. They are criticized as being institutionally weak, fragmented, disunited and not optimal for environmental protection.  It has been found that the current decentralized, poorly funded and strictly intergovernmental regime is below the norm for global environmental issues.  However, the creation of an WEO risks undermining some more effective aspects of current global environmental policy;  in particular, its fragmentation, which stems from flexibility.  This also allows for a more effective response and links in different areas.  Although the environment and climate change are seen as global themes, Levin notes that “it is precisely at this level that state institutions are the least effective and most responsive to trust”, while Oberthur and Gehring say they would offer little more than institutional restructuring for their own good.  Pierre Jacquet, Jean Pisani-Ferry and Laurence Tubiana state that “ensuring that decisions are sustainable for international integration, it is important that the population sees the benefits, that states agree on their objectives and that the institutions that lead the process are seen as legitimate.