Cancun nuancing was to gain India advantage, says Ramesh

NEW DELHI - In an effort to clear the air over India’s nod to legally binding emission cuts at the global climate change talks at Cancun, Mexico, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh has said that nuancing of the position has not hurt national interest, but was aimed at expanding options for India.

Ramesh, who was slammed for coming under pressure from developed countries, wrote a six-page letter to the members of parliament last week, saying India’s stand was guided by its domestic environmental policies.

“My constant effort has been to ensure that India’s negotiating stance is guided by the need to protect our economic growth, inclusive development and poverty eradication agenda. The climate change should be used as a tool of global diplomacy to reposition New Delhi, Ramesh said in his letter.

The minister has also written letters to chief ministers on the issue.

Listing out India’s contribution to Cancun Agreement, Ramesh said he is open to any discussion on the subject.

The environment minister created a flutter during the Nov 29-Dec 10 climate change talks after he proposed that all countries must take binding commitments under appropriate legal forms.

This was a major departure in the 17-year climate change talks, as India had thus far led developing countries in the stance that global warming was a problem caused by rich countries, and it was up to them to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

Ramesh said that his extempore statement at Cancun was a response to increasing pressure from developing country partners to accept a legally binding agreement.

“It was, therefore, important for India to demonstrate that it was not completely oblivious and insensitive to the views and opinions of a large section of the global community. I believe we have been able to walk this thin line effectively with this stand. This nuancing of our position will expand negotiating options for us and give us an all-round advantageous standing,” he said.

Ramesh said that he has called for binding commitment “under appropriate legal form” and not a legally-binding commitment and the phrase could refer to decisions of the Conference of Parties or commitments made by the government to parliament.

“Contrary to some misquoted references in the domestic media, I did not make any commitment on India undertaking absolute emission cuts. India will not be able to even consider a legally-binding agreement till there is clarity on substance, penalties for non-compliance and monitoring system, he said.