As the climate change conference here winds down, India is coming under immense pressure to accept a “legally binding agreement” on climate change, which is causing rift within developing countries.
The United States, India and China are not in favour of accepting a legally binding agreement, which is supported by other developed countries, and several nations within the G77 including African nations and Least Developed Countries.
“There is a concerted move by a group of developed countries using developing countries to put pressure on India and China to accept a legally binding agreement,” Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said.
Pushing hardest for a legally binding treaties are small island nations, which are the most vulnerable to climate change.
Countries in India’s vicinity - Bangladesh, Maldives, Bhutan and Nepal - are also supporting a legally binding agreement.
India’s close allies on the climate change issue - Brazil and South Africa - are also in favour of a legally binding agreement, which is causing divisions within the BASIC group.
“This pressure is coming from developed countries through AOSIS, BASIC and LDCs,” Mr. Ramesh said, adding “India and China are united and Brazil and South Africa are united.”
“At this stage India’s strategy is to keep the door open, the door was being closed on us,” he told journalists.
With the conference closing tomorrow, India has objected to raising the issue so late in the day.
It has also said that currently it is important to concentrate on the Kyoto Protocol, which is the only legally binding treaty on climate change, but its future is uncertain since several countries want to abandon it.
Speaking at an open meeting here, Mr. Ramesh told delegates that “all countries must take on binding commitments under appropriate legal form.”
'Not ready for a legally binding agreement yet'
Later, the minister indicated that he raised this point to assure countries close to India like Nepal and Bangladesh that New Delhi was committed to fulfilling its domestic commitments.
“We will honour these,” he said, noting that India was not ready to reflect these in an international agreement yet. The present discussion has also raised questions about what constitutes the “bindingness” of a treaty.
India, for instance, argues that consensual decisions taken under annual climate conferences can be considered binding.
Indian diplomats here also argue that New Delhi’s promise to the parliament for cutting down carbon intensity can be considered binding since it’s a “serious” nation.
Other countries, however, argue that binding needs to be more formal maybe on the lines of the Kyoto Protocol.
India has also consistently argued that the substance of any outcome needs to be detailed before the form is decided - a position which is supported by Philippines and Egypt.
Mr. Ramesh indicated that India would not agree to any legally binding agreement until three things are clear - the content of legally binding, the penalty of non-compliance and the system of monitoring.
“We are not ready to commit to a legally binding treaty,” he said.
Bolivia, which also objects to a legally binding treaty, is concerned that this new pursuit will take attention away from the Kyoto Protocol, which puts the legal responsibility to cut emissions squarely on the shoulders of developed countries.
Mr. Ramesh also stressed that this episode busted the “mythology” that G-77 spoke as one voice.
“We are under attack inside G 77,” he said. “India has to approach this issue very cautiously.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment