The reported refusal of India to go ahead with their earlier decision to host the UN Climate Conference in 2028 (COP33) came as a shock to many. While it may seem puzzling for a nation which has played a very active role in formulating global climate policies and has advocated for more representation of the Global South, the move has a strategic rationale. The decision by India was based on several economic and political factors influencing climate negotiations and its foreign policy.

On one hand, it can be argued that this move was a step towards pragmatism. The climate talks under the UNFCCC have been under a lot of pressure and strain. Some of the major contributors have either backed off or minimised their participation, and even the critical issue of climate finance remains unaddressed due to lack of participation. For example, the Loss and Damage Fund, whose purpose is to provide support to vulnerable developing countries, lacks sufficient funding because the richer nations have failed to contribute adequately to it.

There is also the geopolitical dimension. Geopolitical considerations and energy security concerns have had a major impact on climate diplomacy. Conflicts and turbulence in the international community have made the world realise the weakness that exists in international cooperation in the absence of unity amongst the nations concerned. India may gain little from the holding of such a crucial event in such a scenario.

Domestically speaking, the focus of India has changed as well. India is currently preoccupied with increasing its energy capacity, developing its industries, and navigating through a difficult process of low-carbon development. Since a lot of investments will be needed for the creation of renewable energy, grid systems, and adaptation plans, the availability of sufficient resources and time may become an immense challenge. Taking into account the above-mentioned factors, it may be more appropriate for India not to allocate money to host the COP33 conference.

However, India faces another price for renouncing the opportunity to organise the conference because it is also a political question rather than a purely organisational matter. Hosting such conferences allows countries to define the agenda, especially those countries which feel marginalized in the world community.

Nonetheless, wider climate leadership of India does not hinge solely on COPs. It is on course to promote renewable energy use, establish international collaborations, and improve energy accessibility. By virtue of its solar energy, climate resilience, and bio-energy networks, it has become quite influential in advocating on behalf of the Global South.

What is now important is not if India should host COP but what should follow thereafter. For India to retain its leadership, it will need to develop itself in three directions. In the first place, it will need to continue working towards climate justice and transfer of climate technologies. Secondly, it will need to convert its success in renewable energy sources into clean energy that is reliable and accessible at affordable prices. Thirdly, it will need to work more closely with developing countries.
← Back to Articles