Change change not in sceptic Modi’s bucket list

Across the world millions of people marched for the climate, to demand substantive action from world leaders. India being a key player in global climate politics, Narendra Modi, instead of showing his commitment towards environment by attending the Ban Ki-moon climate summit, chose to ignore it.

Where was Modi?

On September 23, leaders from across the world are converged in New York for what was one of the biggest climate summits in history, responding to a call of United Nation Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. The summit was hosted to generate “political momentum on climate action” ahead of the December climate talks in Lima, Peru. In the end, more than 120 heads of state are heading for the one-day-long climate summit, aimed to forge a global partnership to tackle the menace of climate change, keeping in view the 2015 Paris deal.

The Paris deal is expected to finalise the legal obligations for countries for not only cutting down their emissions of greenhouse gases in a time-bound manner but also taking their mitigation and adaptation efforts at higher level to deal with climate change post-2020.

From US President Barack Obama to actor Leonardo DiCaprio the list of visiting dignitaries to the Ban Ki-moon Climate Summit was quite impressive. But as impressive as the guest list is, what was more impressive is who gave it a miss.

Interestingly, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin top that list. It is hard to think of three more influential leaders in the world right now — together India and China lead more than three billion people, and more than a third of world’s population. Russia is the fourth largest emitter of greenhouse gas. Not only that but also with the recent development in world’s geo-politics following Mr Modi’s decisive victory in the general election in India that led to the formation of a strong majority right-wing Government, and Mr Modi’s foreign policy favouring the Eastern power blocs, the BRICS meeting, choices that countries like India, China and Russia take can make a paradigm shift in the state-of-affairs of international negotiations.

China and India besides being the first and second-most populous countries on Earth are also the first and third biggest emitters of carbon dioxide. India and China are two of the most powerful players at negotiation tables of climate summit; they shape the policies of some of the blocs like G77+China and Like Minded Developing Countries. Mr Modi’s absence will be seen as a serious snub to Ban Ki-moon and the UN process. India has a key role in talks on developing a global response.

According to a report that has appeared at The Times of India, Mr Modi has decided to skip the climate summit since “the summit is not connected with the negotiations on climate change, except to build a political momentum at the highest levels before the key negotiations”, and since, Mr Modi “would have nothing to do until September 30 when he meets Mr Obama” for the UN General Assembly meeting.

After much criticism from civil societies, the Modi administration is sending its Union Minister for Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Mr Prakash Javadekar, to represent the summit. Mr Tony de Brum, Foreign Minister of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, expressed his shock and disappointment at Mr Modi’s and President Xi’s decision to skip such an important meet. He has stated that “every study I have ever read makes it clear that developing countries have the most to lose from runaway climate change….we expect solidarity from our developing country compatriots, not excuses”.

Mr Modi, who once seemed to be vocal about climate change, and had authored one book on it — Convenient Action: Gujarat’s Response To Challenges of Climate Change— while he was the Chief Minister of Gujarat, have recently suggested that he may have to view the issue (of climate change) “less seriously than other issues facing India”. In the last few months the ModiGovernment have relaxed environmental norms and eased green clearances to serve the interests of the industry under the garb of fast-tracking ‘developmental projects’. The Union Government has virtually rendered toothless several bodies like National Wildlife Board and National Green Tribunal; cleared field trials for genetically modified crops and diluted certain key sections of Forest Rights Act and so on.

Not just ‘belittling’ the issue of climate change, but the Prime Minister came as a climate sceptic when in his speech earlier this month he said, “Climate change has not occurred. People have changed”

Ironically, climate change is one of the pressing problems that India is bearing the brunt of right now. From 2013 Uttarakhand flash floods to hailstorm in Maharashtra and from severe drought in Bihar to Kashmir floods earlier this month, the instances of the impact of climate change and the loss and damage to life and property emanating out of it are many.

When the BJP Government led by Mr Modi assumed power in May, this year, it was expected that he has an opportunity to play to his avowed strength and leave a new legacy – of executing foreign commitments efficiently, which includes India’s commitment to tackle climate change and lead the talks at a global level.

India’s stance at the international climate talks so far has been tough and tensed, with many issues still remained to be smoothed out between them and other big emitters such as the EU and US. The BKM Summit could have been a launch pad for the Modi Government to define its stand on climate policies and its resolve to tackle the issues, given Mr Modi’s strong mandate and India’s changing dynamics of foreign affairs. Mr Modi could have made the best use of this summit to familiarise himself more with the international politics of climate change before the Lima meet in December. However, sadly, the decisive Prime Minister of India chose to ignore the plea of millions of people, including the UN Secretary General himself.

Experts are calling Mr Modi’s decision to skip the BKM Summit as a good strategic move. No country is required to show its contribution to the 2015 agreement before March 2015 — certainly not the developing countries.But, Delhi’s decision will raise yet more questions over the Indian Government’s commitment to addressing climate change, despite the country’s known vulnerability to changing weather patterns.

Climate change is affecting all of us in many disastrous ways, no matter who or what we are. Two days back millions across the world created a history by marching for the climate and calling for substantive action by the Governments and world powers to tackle climate change. In New Delhi, too, I walked the streets at People’s Climate March with thousand others to demand action from the Government, for us, for the future. If we don’t start cleaning up today there will be no future left to fix tomorrow.

India’s energy security does not lie in lofty promises of fast-track clearances for coal mines and thermal power projects, something the industry pack is baying for. In a country of more than a billion people, you cannot ride roughshod over peoples’ rights and livelihoods by brute force – not for long.

About The Author

Avik is a journalist from India, working with The Pioneer. A powershifter and an activist, he writes on environment & climate change issues.

  • Guenier

    Avik: I hate to rain (almost literally in this case!) on your parade - but wherever did you get the idea that “millions of people marched for the climate”? So far as I’m aware, by far the largest turnout for the “Peoples’ Climate March” was in New York and the best estimate I’ve seen of the turnout there was about 125,000. And that was not from an evil denier but from a strong supporter of the March.

    See http://www.firemtn.blogspot.ca/2014/09/once-more-on-counting-crowds-at-demos.html?m=1 and (a follow-up) this: http://www.firemtn.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/now-its-400000-climate-marchers-puh.html

  • http://www.joshuawiese.com Joshua Wiese

    I’ve tracked this pretty closely through colleagues who organized the march and mobilization. The official count for New York was 400,000. And there were between 200,00 and 300,000 people taking part in mobilizations outside of New York, around the world. Definitely not millions, yet. But over half a million is a good start!

  • Guenier

    Well, I’m inclined to stay with 125,000 in NY - I thought the Jimmy Higgins articles fairly convincing, especially the second. In any case, see this Guardian analysis of marches in London: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/28/demonstrations-protests-uk-list Of recent protests, the largest were against the cuts, for hunting and against the Iraq war. All (probably) bigger than the NY march, yet look where they got: nowhere.

    Perhaps it’s more relevant that the 5 million people from across the world who have so far participated in the UN’s own “My World” survey for a Better World put “Action Taken On Climate Change” at the very bottom: http://data.myworld2015.org

  • Guenier

    In truth, Avik, the New York ‘summit’ was really a damp squib, marking zero progress in climate negotiations.

    In his speech, President Obama was clear:

 “We can only succeed in combating climate change if we are joined in this effort by every nation — developed and developing alike. Nobody gets a pass.”**

 Now compare that with India’s reaction. Prakash Javedekar, the environment minister, as reported in a post conference interview with the New York Times, said: “India’s first task is eradication of poverty. Twenty percent of our population doesn’t
have access to electricity, and that’s our top priority. We will grow faster, and our emissions will rise.”***



    And, as adoptanegotiator knows better than most, that reflects the reason why climate conferences and negotiations from the Copenhagen debacle to today have failed: developing economies’ insistence on prioritising economic development and the eradication of poverty over emission reduction. It’s a position they are entitled to take under the terms of the UNFCCC and it’s a position that would appear to be justified by, for example, China’s remarkable record of lifting around 600 million people out of poverty in recent years by providing them with access to inexpensive, reliable electricity derived from fossil fuels.

    Unless that approach is reversed - and currently there’s no sign that it will be - Paris 2015 will make no more progress than Copenhagen 2009.

    ** http://www.businessinsider.com/nobody-gets-a-pass-obama-demands-all-nations-join-climate-change-fight-2014-9

    *** http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/world/asia/25climate.html?_r=0 
 See also: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/India-to-pitch-for-right-to-grow-for-poor-nations-during-UN-Climate-Summit/articleshow/43248278.cms