The top leaders have all flown back from Paris after making the usual noise about the importance of climate control measures. All the presidents, prime ministers and assorted dictators gave pious and solemn commitments to tackle global warming and control carbon emissions. The real hard work is now going on in Paris: that of behind the scenes bare knuckled and rough negotiations between countries and groups of countries. As it invariably happens, a bunch of rich, developed economies are ranged against a much larger bunch of poor, developing economies. In a mystery that needs to be studied by foreign policy experts, India is again emerging as the recalcitrant villain which refuses to cooperate in taking effective steps to control carbon emissions.
Even as the so called COP 21 negotiations go on in Paris, brace yourself for more of the same from Nairobi in Kenya beginning December 15. That is when representatives from all countries will gather to continue the seemingly never ending negotiations under the aegis of the World Trade Organization. In Paris, India is facing First World demands, and exhortations from well meaning civil society organizations that could cripple future economic growth. In Nairobi, it will face First World demands to make its agriculture sector more open to predatory imports. Essentially, India and economies like India want to retain the right to impose tariffs on agriculture imports if they threaten the livelihood of farmers. First World countries argue that this violates the spirit and charter of the WTO. Usually, one finds Brazil in the same corner as India in these global meets. But in Nairobi, Brazil will join First World economies in applying pressure on India since it is one of the largest agricultural exporters in the world. Since nobody, either from governments or from media seems to care to offend China, India could well once again become the favorite whipping boy during the WTO negotiations in Nairobi.
It would be silly, and pointless to argue, like many left and right wing ideologues (the only thing they agree on, apart from curbing freedom of expression!) do that there is a global conspiracy against India. The fact is, India is not Nepal. It is a $ 2 trillion plus economy which will certainly become a $ 5 trillion economy by 2025. In the future, what happens in India and what India decides at an economic policy level will certainly have global outcomes. Yet, history and facts are on India's side, no matter how much pressure First World nations apply and no matter how stupidly large sections of Indian media parrot what is peddled by the likes of
The Economist and
The New York Times.Take climate control. There is no doubt that India is number four in the list of top carbon emitting and polluting countries of the world. No surprise in that. India has the second largest population in the world and is now the third largest economy in the world in terms of purchasing power parity. But there is more to it. In per capita terms, carbon emissions from India because of economic activities are lower than than even the global average. And what does history say? Between 1990 and 2011, the United States accounted for 16 per cent of cumulative emissions; China accounted for 15 per cent and the European Union contributed 12 per cent. In contrast, India accounted for 4 per cent. The contrast becomes even more stark if we go back in history. Between 1850 and 2011, the United States accounted for 27 per cent of cumulative carbon emissions; the European Union for 25 per cent and China for 11 per cent. India's contribution was a mere 3 per cent. India still has more close to 400 million citizens living in absolute poverty. As it ramps up economic efforts to lift them above the poverty line, the carbon footprint of India will inevitably expand. But does the Indian economy have any choice? No matter how the First World lectures and what green activists dream about, can it abandon coal? Things will not be very different when WTO talks begin in Nairobi on December, 15. India will be under pressure to surrender on the critical issue of agricultural trade. First World economies contend that India is using the protection of poor farmers as an excuse to violate WTO agreements. Once again, some facts. For two decades and more, Third World economies like India have been demanding that the G-7 countries stop subsiding their farm produce so that exports from poor economies have a chance to compete. Estimates of farm subsidies in the G-7 economies range from $ 300 to $ 500 billion a year. The G-7 economies have not budged an inch. Ironically, it is these economies that now demand that India not only budge, but give up. Less than 5 per cent of the population in G-7 countries is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. In India, close to 50 per cent is. So should India stop worrying about 600 million citizens just because some silly WTO wonks want more global trade in agriculture?
The fact is: India has no choice but to adopt a tough stance while negotiating. It would also help if the Indian media learns a few basic lessons in the art and practice of global capitalism before hectoring Indian policy makers for being rigid spoil sports. Two examples will show how terms like free market and free trade are mere words, almost never implemented in practice even by "capitalist" economies. Indigo has emerged as one of the most successful and profitable low cost airlines over the last decade. Do you think it has a chance to enter the massive American aviation market? Fact is, forget launching services there, it has to depend on " bilaterals" ( permission at the discretion of the American government) to even start a flight from India to an American city. Private sector banks like HDFC Bank and Yes Bank have done spectacularly well in India. You think they will be allowed to start branches in major American cities?
Environment, trade, intellectual property rights and many more contentious issues present tough negotiating challenges to India. It has to combat First World Imperialism without resorting to needless rhetoric.
