In Bonn, India leads climate finance fight for developing world ahead of COP30
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
( Originally published on Jun 24, 2025 )
Backed by strong interventions led by India, coalitions such as G77+China, the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC), Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and the African Group of Negotiators (AGN) came together to raise the issue of climate finance accountability at the ongoing SB62 Bonn climate conference The mobilisation of developing nations at Bonn is likely to set the tone for the upcoming COP30 in Brazil, where there is expected to be a strong push to include Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement as a formal agenda item. This comes against the backdrop of widespread disappointment with the climate finance outcomes at COP29 in Baku in 2024.The Bonn conference - an annual precursor to the COP - has seen a standoff between developed and developing countries over including Article 9.1 as a standalone agenda item. The article underscores the obligation of developed countries to provide financial resources to support both mitigation and adaptation efforts in developing nations.Although the demand to list Article 9.1 formally on the agenda was not accepted, the conference Chairs permitted a formal consultation on the issue on June 23. India and Bolivia led the discussions, with active interventions from Nigeria, Chad, and the Arab Group.At the heart of the debate is Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which states: "Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention."However, developing nations argue that the poor implementation of Article 9.1 has undermined both climate equity and trust in the global climate regime. Most climate finance, they note, continues to be in the form of loans rather than grants, increasing the financial burden on vulnerable economies.India made a forceful pitch during the formal consultation, describing Article 9.1 not just as a moral imperative, but a legal obligation and the "cornerstone of climate equity." It cautioned that strategic deflections from the issue would only delay global climate action and asserted that the commitment cannot be replaced by loosely defined or indirect support mechanisms.Expressing concern over what it called a weakening of multilateralism in climate action , India stressed that implementing Article 9.1 was essential to restoring credibility, balance, and trust in the climate regime.India also termed the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance, announced at COP29 in Baku, as "grossly inadequate," "incomplete," and an "eyewash," sources told ET.The Indian delegation also flagged shifting narratives that place unrealistic burdens on developing countries, ignoring their domestic priorities and development challenges. It emphasised that additional climate finance must not come at the cost of undermining national development goals.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
India's rare earth push aims to reduce reliance on imports: Report
India is making efforts to reduce its reliance on imported rare earth materials, which are vital to electric vehicles (EVs), renewable energy systems, electronics, and defense applications. Consulting firm Primus Partners has published a paper called "From Extraction to Innovation," which lays out a plan to ramp up domestic capabilities in critical rare earth magnets, as part of the government's overall aim to build domestic development. Consulting firm Primus Partners has published a paper called "From Extraction to Innovation," which lays out a plan to ramp up domestic capabilities in critical rare earth magnets, as part of the government's overall aim to build domestic development. Policy vision versus ground reality The report lays out five recommendations that, on paper, create a roadmap for India. These comprise long-term price guarantees on neodymium-praseodymium (NdPr) oxide and NdFeB magnets, pilot hubs in our mineral abundant states, ramping up of production at Indian Rare Earths Limited (IREL), a national magnet stockpile and a central coordination cell with NITI Aayog or DPIIT. It also suggests a National Rare Earth Innovation Hub to encourage research and global technology partnerships. Collectively, these concepts offer a systematic methodology, but they also highlight just how much of India's rare earth plans are only beginning. Also Read : China+1 strategy boosts India's role in global auto component supply chains: Reports Small steps forward Recent actions reflect intent but also the magnitude of the deficit. The Union Budget 2024–25 granted customs duty exemption on essential minerals, indicating policy encouragement. And last year, IREL commissioned a Rare Earth Permanent Magnet (REPM) facility in Visakhapatnam. At ₹197 crore and with an annual capacity of 3,000 kg, the facility is a milestone — yet modest when compared to global production volumes. Global dependence remains entrenched The elephant in the room is still China. Controlling nearly 90 per cent of global rare earth magnet production, Beijing's dominance has left supply chains vulnerable to policy shifts and export restrictions. India, despite its mineral potential, is still far from matching that scale. Exploration projects in Jammu & Kashmir, Rajasthan, Jharkhand and Karnataka have begun, while Khanij Bidesh India Limited (KABIL) is seeking overseas tie-ups. But these are long-gestation efforts. Rising demand, sharper risks The pressure is only set to grow. India has set a target of 30 per cent EV penetration by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2070. Each EV requires up to 2 kg of NdFeB magnets, and demand could cross 7,000 tonnes by 2030, according to the report. This demand goes beyond mobility — renewable energy, automation, and defence all compete for the same resources. The irony is clear: India's clean energy transition could become dependent on a resource it does not yet control. The roadmap offers direction, but unless mining, refining, and manufacturing capabilities are scaled up quickly, India risks swapping one form of energy dependence for another. Get insights into Upcoming Cars In India, Electric Vehicles, Upcoming Bikes in India and cutting-edge technology transforming the automotive landscape. First Published Date:
Hans India
7 hours ago
- Hans India
Rahul's disclosure - Balancing between candour and discretion
In the India-China debate, candour demands telling the nation what it must know, while discretion shields what must never be revealed. Leadership is tested not in choosing one over the other, but in keeping 'both in balance, so that truth and security march together. In today's India-China discourse, that balance is not optional; it is vital. Onlywhen India-China frontier vigilance and democratic resilience stand together does the nation remain unshaken. The storm over Rahul Gandhi's revelation that 2000 Square km of Indian territory, after the December 2022 Yangtse clash in Arunachal Pradesh, was under Chinese occupation, echoes political reflex, not reason. The Supreme Court's remark, 'If you are a true Indian, you would not say this' may lead to effectively challenging the credibility of the Leader of the Opposition. As the verbal crossfire escalated, the BJP charged Rahul Gandhi with endangering national security, while the Congress accused Modi government of concealing truths as regards China, distilling its attack as 'deny, distract, lie and justify (DDLJ)'. When Rahul Gandhi stated that China had occupied Indian territory he was not merely citing a number, but entering a long-contested arena where the boundaries between strategic fact, political contest, and constitutional liberty blur. Whether his figure rests on classified inputs, field intelligence or political positioning is a fair subject for scrutiny and may be for discussion. Yet the right to voice such a view, and the equally important right to question it, are constitutional guarantees, not privileges. Freedom of speech and the right to seek accountability remain at the very core of citizenship in a sovereign democratic republic. To ask the Leader of Opposition, 'The shadow Prime Minister' in Parliamentary-Constitutional terms, 'Are you an Indian' for stating a contested territorial claim, amounts to shifting the debate in ways that weaken democratic dialogue and fuel political polarization. The Constitution that empowers the 'Prime Minister' to negotiate with the neighbouring country, equally empowers the 'shadow Prime Minister' to question those negotiations. In 'The Wisdom of China and India', Lin Yutang described the balance between 'candour and discretion' as a hallmark of enduring civilizations, a balance that means being honest and open while remaining mindful of context, audience, and the potential impact of words. Yutang presented this not as a formal political dictum but as part of a broader reflection on the qualities that enable civilizations to survive. For him, candour (openness and truthfulness) and discretion (prudence and restraint) are complementary virtues, each incomplete without the other, and essential to the society's moral resilience. His context, however, was cultural and philosophical, never about India-China border politics. Yet the principle strikingly resonates with diplomacy and statecraft, as in the case of Rahul's alleged controversial remarks. Though Yutang never used the precise phrase 'candour and discretion' either in 'The Wisdom of China and India' or elsewhere, the idea captures a central theme-truth tempered by restraint. These two sentences: 'Criticism as the highest intellectual effort that mankind is capable of, and above all, the most difficult attainment of an educated man' and 'There is no such thing as true freedom of speech……No one can afford to let his neighbours know what he is thinking about them' together convey the meaning. They underscore Lin's belief that speaking truthfully is admirable, but carries a cost like Rahul's remarks on Chinese occupation. In the India-China debate, candour demands telling the nation what it must know, while discretion shields what must never be revealed. Leadership is tested not in choosing one over the other, but in keeping 'both in balance, so that truth and security march together. In today's India-China discourse, that balance is not optional; it is vital. The Yangtse clash was no isolated skirmish. It was another calculated move in a long series of Chinese provocations designed to 'probe India's strategic patience.' Its pattern echoed the choreography of earlier confrontations, most starkly the bloody Galwan Valley clash of June 2020. In 2017, the 73-day Doklam stand-off, over a plateau claimed by Bhutan but critical to India's security, ended in what was hailed as a diplomatic success. Yet Beijing's road-building therepressed on, exposing the limits of such victories. The much-touted 1993 and 1996 'confidence-building agreements' between India and China now stand as hollow reminders that paper assurances cannot restrain a determined adversary. The 'right to expression and the right to question are not luxuries' for calm times; they are the 'democratic armour citizens must wear even in times of strain.' Guarding borders is a solemn duty, but guarding the freedoms that permit questioning is an equally sacred obligation. The India-China frontier is not just a cartographic demarcation; it is a living, shifting fault line where history, strategy, and politics collide. Since Independence, relations between these two newly freed Asian Giants have unfolded as a saga of misplaced hope, cultural nostalgia, strategic misjudgment, and unforgiving geopolitical realities, entwined with aspirations of Pan-Asian solidarity, shared civilisational wisdom, and moral leadership in a world still struggling to heal from the brutality of war and the shadow of imperialism. India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru believed that India and China were sisters awakening after centuries of slumber under foreign rule. He established diplomatic relations with Mao Zedong's China when many nations hesitated. Nehruvian diplomacy led to signing of 'Panchsheel'. Later, Nehru declared in the Lok Sabha, 'Panchsheel is not a mere diplomatic device. It is the very basis of our moral philosophy in international affairs.' Mao endorsed the spirit. Zhou Enlai during his visits to India reinforced the image of Sino-Indian friendship saying, 'Our two countries are linked by the Himalayas, and even these high mountains should not divide us.' Soon the 'Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai' phrase became popular. Nehru's great grandson Rahul's assertion that 'China occupied Indian territory' should not be seen as weakening national resolve. This is not merely about land lost or held, but it is about the square space essential for free expression and rigorous questioning. Supreme Court questioning Rahul Gandhi is both revealing and troubling. Whether symbolic, rhetorical, or reactionary, such a query rests on shaky ground. Why should dissent or questioning define nationality? The 'challenge before India is to guard icy heights where the flag flies, yet, the flag loses meaning without civic freedoms' the wind that keeps it aloft and the moral frontier as vital to defend as is the territorial one.
Mint
10 hours ago
- Mint
Applied Materials Suffers Worst Rout Since 2020 on China Woes
Applied Materials Inc. suffered the worst single-day stock decline in five years after giving a disappointing sales and profit forecast, renewing concerns that the US trade dispute with China is weighing on demand. Revenue will be approximately $6.7 billion in the fiscal fourth quarter, the company said in a statement Thursday. Analysts had estimated $7.32 billion on average. Profit will be about $2.11 a share, excluding some items, compared with a projection of $2.38. Applied Materials, the largest American producer of chipmaking gear, is seeing less demand from customers in China, Chief Executive Officer Gary Dickerson said in an interview. It also faces delays in approval for exporting technology to that country, he said. Moreover, large customers are putting off some purchases in the face of prolonged negotiations around tariffs and other economic issues. 'It just creates a level of uncertainty,' Dickerson said. The outlook sent shares of Applied Materials down 14% on Friday, the most since the early days of the pandemic in March 2020. They had been up 16% this year heading into the report. In the third quarter, which ended July 27, revenue rose 7.7% to $7.3 billion. Analysts had anticipated $7.21 billion on average, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Profit was $2.48 a share, compared with an estimate of $2.36. Applied Materials' customer ranks include some of the biggest names in the chip industry, such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Samsung Electronics Co. and Intel Corp. Those manufacturers order gear well ahead of starting production, making Applied Materials' forecasts a barometer for future demand. The company said last week that it would participate in an Apple Inc. plan to boost manufacturing in the US by spending more than $200 million on a facility in Arizona. Applied Materials will also sell equipment to Texas Instruments Inc.'s US factories to support Apple products. 'Applied Materials' decision to be a core member of Apple's 'American Manufacturing Program,' a drive to increase factory production within the US, could strengthen its position as a key supplier of chipmaking tools for advanced semiconductors used in iPhones,' Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Masahiro Wakasugi said in a note. 'The new administration is very focused on increasing semiconductor supply in the United States,' Dickerson said on Thursday. 'We're very positive.' In July, rival Lam Research Corp. said revenue for the quarter ending in December would ease from the current-quarter levels, with Chinese customers potentially scaling back after a spending spree. In a further sign of US-China tensions, Applied Materials was recently sued by Beijing E-Town Semiconductor Technology Co. over what that company characterized as trade secret theft. Still, Dickerson said the long-term demand outlook for computing power remains strong. Customers in China had significantly ramped up buying in recent years, and are now just digesting those purchases, he said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
