India, a gas bag on global warming

BREAKTHROUGH OR BREAKDOWN? The Bali summit could not take substantive steps to fight global warming.

        

Other stories in the section:

Kashmiriyat: A tradition of warmth and hospitality

After protests broke out, locals ensured the safety of the yatris.

• J&K land row: No Dialogue due to militancy, politics

Featured Blog

Abhishek Patni

MAULANA MULAYAM AND PERILS OF NUCLEAR DEAL

Featured Slideshows

The planet is overheating and so are the arguments between the developed and developing countries on who should cut carbon emissions first. Last week 190 countries met in Bali to discover how the world can arrive at a new global treaty to lay down specific targets to reduce emission of greenhouse gases. But the summit ended in a stalemate.

The Indian delegation was led by Science and Technology Minister Kapil Sibal, who made it clear that the country would not accept any binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

And that brings us to the question of the day that was asked on CNN-IBN show Face the Nation: Is India doing enough to combat global warming?

Director of Centre for Science and Environment Sunita Narain tried to discuss the issue threadbare.

Narain began the discussion by saying that the world leaders had failed to strike a deal in combating emission.

“Bali was a very important opportunity for the world. We know that countries like the US and EU have to do a lot more to cut emissions but in Bali, I believe, world leaders failed us all. They did not have the leadership to say that we will put aside our petty economic interests,” Narain said.

Many believe that Kapil Sibal was aggressive and he successfully fought off impositions on any binding targets on reducing greenhouse gases. But was it required to be aggressive about India’s national interest or should he have joined the world leaders to have targets on everybody.

Agreeing with the Science and Technology Minister’s stance at the summit, Narain said, “I think the minister did right in fighting off the targets on countries like India and China. I do not criticise the minister for being aggressive at that moment. But I am critical of the fact that the Indian government did not do enough to be able to assert the fact that we needed targets from the rich nations. How can all the countries give in to pressure from one country, which is the US.”

Are we hurtling towards extinction?

The main points of difference at the Bali summit were over references to the depth of emissions cuts needed. The US opposed any reference to actual emissions targets and over the role of developing countries in sharing the burden of making these cuts.

In the past year, the debate on climate change has changed in character. The publication of the findings of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in three parts between February and June, was a watershed.