India’s coal stance at COP26 was about money – party politics a threat to long-term goals

Form of words:
a-
A+

TeaThe United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP26, concluded in Glasgow on 13 November. India’s stand on coal gave rise to a narrative that projected a ‘hold-out’. China too had a hold-out, but managed to remain in the shadows in terms of image. There was more light on India.

hit a single phrase deal Between India, China and America. In all likelihood, there must be more than a grain of truth in it. That phrase was ‘outside or down’. To put this in context, it has to be related to the general term ‘phase’. The choice was about ‘phase-out’ or ‘phase-down’ of coal usage.

Prior to the controversy over coal, the US and China—the two biggest contributors to climate change and also the biggest coal polluter—used the term ‘phase down’ in their mutual agreement. India (as the third largest coal polluter) and China insisted on a ‘phase down’ in the final declaration, which could only then be passed unanimously. Both caught on to the word and America made it possible. India may have won its battle but may be ready to lose the big war.

Who is benefiting from the COP26 policy?

What factors will determine India’s stance remains speculation, but needs to be questioned whether this policy stance will be beneficial to India or a narrow-minded group. Weighted on this scale, the policy seems short-sighted and questions its lack of vision. The long-term outlook appears to be absconding. Instead, the short-term gains of domestic politics appear to be a main area of ​​concern. If the government does not protect the Indian coal industry and at the same time highlight India’s potential for alternative energy, the country has the best potential to make a meaningful contribution to one of the most important aspects of climate change, and In the process modernize and strengthen our industrial. Capacity. This can be an advantageous situation.

But a change in India’s industrial policies would require removing the temptations of the Party in power, by various industrial groups interested in keeping the use of coal alive to fund the Party’s coffers. Concurrently, the collection of money from the affluent for the party treasury has become stronger and legitimized through electoral bonds. Therefore, money power can play a role that is detrimental to India’s long-term interests. It may also play a useful role, and Jeff Bezos Announcement The total contribution of $3 billion to the COP26 summit is indicative. India too has its share of such philanthropists.

read also, India’s economy and stability important for post-Covid world: WEF President

Why this kind of approach can hurt India in the long run

At the heart of the damage done by money power that controls party politics is the danger that it could threaten India’s developmental progress. If the nation holds on to its position, it could only result in expanded coal use, posing a risk of breaching the global temperature limit, which is desperately needed to maximize national contributions. India can play a major role by adopting a policy of accelerating the pace of development of alternative energy resources with the aim of phasing out coal. In the interim, it has the option of developing technology that reduces pollution from coal to some extent. However, with the current stance, India is indicating that it is not ready to give its best.

Developing alternative potential for energy resources to mitigate the effects of climate change is being sought as India’s third largest polluter of coal. Instead of placing its weight in favor of abstaining from coal in the long run, it has joined hands with the US and China to downplay the global intention to phase out coal. However, it can always review its stance and change its internal industrial policy to develop affordable and clean alternative energy resources.

Indian national security planners should have no doubt that climate change and nuclear weapons are two long-term, existential threats to the world, and India in particular. The global situation is grim on both these fronts. In the case of nuclear weapons, rising global geopolitical tensions are fueling the nuclear and conventional arms race and expanding the potential for casual war between nuclear powers. There is insufficient political and public recognition of scientific evidence that a single nuclear exchange – resulting in about 100 nuclear explosions – could pose a potential threat to humanity due to the long-term effects on climate change that have been described as .nuclear winter, These are effects in addition to the immediate effects of explosions, fire, smoke and radiation. They are also caused by the long-term effects of lowering global surface temperatures through the blocking of the Sun’s rays by clouds of dust and smoke, which will remain at different levels of Earth’s atmosphere. The impact on the Earth’s biosphere would seriously affect agricultural production and access to clean air and water.

Computer modeling indicates that the India-Pakistan nuclear exchange could affect the agricultural output of China and other Asian countries, and therefore trigger regional and global social upheavals that snowball and further intensify geopolitical tensions. , which in turn would make it nearly impossible to do global work. Cooperation on mitigation measures to combat climate change.

Read also: Climate experts back India’s stand on ‘phase down’ over ‘phase out’ of coal at COP26

The Way Forward – Loose Government Grip

If India does not develop its industrial potential, it cannot become a power of consequence. For that the current political economy has to be changed. A major impediment to that development is the role played by the nexus of political-bureaucratic-corporate interests. This requires shaping policies that promote the loosening of government control over the development of India’s industrial capacity, while simultaneously encouraging innovation, technological development, and providing appropriate energy and transportation infrastructure, among other things. Do it. The essential switch in government attitude is one of being from a controller to an actuator. Relinquishing excessive control requires reducing the flow from industry to party coffers. India’s stand on coal in Glasgow perhaps indicates that narrow domestic party interests are throttling reforms, which should aim to fuel India’s economic growth, and are characterized by political sensitivity to climate change impacts.

For India’s political economy, global cooperation on climate change may be in short supply and the rich polluters of antiquity may be unwilling to provide India with sufficient financial support to transform its energy resource base. This situation should prompt India to challenge itself and set goals that should unleash its potential. National planners should adopt a long-term perspective. At present, it seems that short-term domestic political gains are playing a role that is detrimental to long-term interests.

India’s challenges will certainly deepen in the recovery of the country’s political economy from the ravages of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. But the Indian political leadership and the public must remind themselves of Plato’s warning: those engrossed in the pursuit of money are unfit to rule the state.

Lt Gen (Dr) Prakash Menon (Retd) Director, Strategic Studies Programme, Taxila Institute; Former Military Adviser, National Security Council Secretariat; and former member, Executive Council, IDSA. He tweeted @prakashmenon51. Thoughts are personal.

(Edited by Likes)

subscribe our channel youtube And Wire