lima talks have at least something to show
Given that the ‘Twentieth Conference of the Parties' of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change could have had a worse end, it is a matter of some relief that at least the participants agreed on a broad, if not entirely satisfactory, agreement, bringing the developed and the developing countries on one page.
From India's perspective, if one goes by the remarks of the Union Minister of State for Environment and Forests, Mr Prakash Javadekar, the deal is fine, since it urges nations to provide financial support to developing countries to meet the latter's mitigation goals, and takes into account the fact that the per capita carbon emission in developed countries is higher than those in the developing world. These two have been subjects of intense debate, with countries such as India pointing out that the developed nations could not demand unreasonable cut-backs in emission from the developing ones since that would severely compromise industrial growth of the latter.
The developing bloc also, correctly, said that the developed nations had reached a level after having polluted the environment enough and, therefore, they should put in more money where their mouth is. The final agreement has, in view of the conflicts that threatened to derail the talks in lima, Peru, steered clear of many politically sensitive issues.
The ‘watered-down’ agreement may not appeal to environmental activists, but then these people are not in the business of running Governments or meeting aspirations of economic development. While the activists can afford to have a one-track approach, a Government has to be multi-dimensional. Had the friction not been resolved in the nick of time in lima, the disagreement could have threatened the Paris 2015 deadline to finalise an international agreement on climate change.
While India did not want to be seen, along with a few other countries, as an obstacle to that end, it certainly was not prepared to bear the burden of cleaning the environmental mess created and left behind by the developed world. New Delhi also made it clear that while it is committed to the reduction of emission levels, it would do so in a phased and realistic manner and not be pushed hastily into it. It is here that the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities' kicks in. While all sides agree on the need to tackle climate change, those who polluted the most to reach a level where they can afford more than the rest to clean up, should accept the responsibility. Interestingly, China, which has signed a separate climate change agreement with the US, seemed on the same page as that of India. Beijing blocked a European Union suggestion that would bind countries to accountability for the promises they made.
The lima ‘success’ apart, India should not be celebrating much because the country does face a serious climate change issue. Over the next few months, in the run-up to the Paris meet, New Delhi has to share its action plan to contribute in containing the rise in global temperature, besides other issues. The new Government has to demonstrate that commitment even as it proceeds to trigger higher economic growth. How the Narendra Modi regime manages the two traditionally ‘conflicting' interests, remains to be seen.