Paris climate pact not ideal, but it’s a good start
Given how the previous Conference of Parties under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change had failed to produce a common minimum agreement on an issue which impacts every country on the planet, the very fact that a deal has been produced in Paris deserves to be welcomed. As many as 195 countries adopted the Paris agreement on Saturday — a milestone in the world's fight against climate change — agreeing to restrict average global warming to two degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels, and if possible, limit it further to 1.5 degree Celsius. What the world leaders couldn't agree upon was how they shall achieve this target. Understandably, any agreement that brings together so many stakeholders, each with its own disparate set of interests and aspirations, is bound to have compromises and, in this context, the Paris deal is no different: It has guidelines and recommendations for saving the planet but no legally binding requirements. However, before tearing apart the agreement for its many shortcomings, let us acknowledge the significance of this moment when every single country on the planet commits itself to a common cause.
That said, the Paris agreement could have been more meaningful, if not fairer to developing countries, had the developed countries made a more sincere effort. There is no denying that, while climate change is a global threat that can only be contained by the combined efforts of all countries, developed countries have a historical responsibility to clean up the mess that they made on their way to ‘development'. As Union Minister for Environment Prakash Javadekar, who led India's delegation at Paris, said: “The Paris Agreement does not put us on the path to prevent temperature rise below two degrees Celsius, and the actions of developed countries are far below their historical responsibilities and fair share.” Developed countries should have agreed to legally binding emission cuts and made stronger commitments to providing financial assistance to developing countries as the latter switch from dirty but cheap fossil fuels to clean but still prohibitively expensive renewable energy sources. The Paris agreement not only gives developed countries an easy pass; it, in fact, almost lets them off the hook by surreptitiously eroding the principle of common but differentiated responsibility that has been the bedrock of climate change negotiations all these years. This is most evident in the call to developing countries — not just developed countries, as was the case with the 1997 Kyoto Protocol — to publicly commit themselves to emission reduction actions. Similarly, another global call to make “finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilient development” is sure to hit developing countries (particularly India), which are still growing on the back of fossil fuels but now may find it difficult to raise foreign funds for their immediate energy needs.