Full potential of India-US civil nuclear deal remains untapped: Expert

'While New Delhi is yet to remove obstacles that prevent its purchase of nuclear reactors from the United States, Washington has not been able to match the policy with vision'

PTI 

Washington 

Published 27.11.23


Representational image.

More than 18 years after India and the US signed a civil nuclear deal, its full potential and promise along with the larger bilateral partnership is yet to be realised, according to a top American expert.

While New Delhi is yet to remove obstacles that prevent its purchase of nuclear reactors from the United States, Washington has not been able to match the policy with vision, Ashley J Tellis, the Tata Chair for Strategic Affairs and a senior fellow at the prestigious Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said.

US President Joe Biden's ambition to finally fructify the 2005 civil nuclear agreement cannot end with the sale of US nuclear reactors to India. Rather, it must extend to revising long-standing US policies that continue to make the existence of India's nuclear weapons programme an insuperable obstacle to deepened technological cooperation, he asserted in an opinion piece published by Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on Monday.


"Where India is concerned, New Delhi is long overdue in removing the obstacles that prevent its purchase of nuclear reactors from the United States, consistent with the written commitments it made during the implementation of the nuclear deal. Where the United States is concerned, a different challenge persists that is no less urgent: matching policy with vision," he added.

Tellis noted that after Biden's visit to India in September, the joint statement declared that the two leaders "welcomed intensified consultations between the relevant entities on both sides to expand opportunities for facilitating India-US collaboration in nuclear energy, including in development of next-generation small modular reactor technologies in a collaborative mode".

Realising this promise, however, will require solutions that have eluded the two sides thus far, said the Indian-American expert.

Westinghouse, the supplier of high-output nuclear power plants, remains skittish about sales to India with the absence of a durable assurance of limited liability in the event of an accident.

At least one other American company, Holtec International, which supplies small modular reactors (SMRs), already operates a components factory in India and is eager to explore SMR sales in the country and across West Asia but these discussions are still in the early stages.

Given the Biden administration's interest in consummating the civil nuclear agreement, as well as India's interest in expanding foreign participation in its nuclear energy programme, it is past time for the Modi government to rectify the nuclear liability problems that it has inherited ironically due to the obstructiveness of Modi's own party, albeit long before he led it, Tellis wrote.

The cleanest solution to the current predicament would be to amend India's Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act (CLNDA) to bring it in line with the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) by channelling all liability in case of a nuclear accident solely to the operator of a nuclear plant, with the operator in turn protecting its interests by relying on an insurance pool for financial safety. India has already moved to create such an insurance pool pursuant to the CLNDA but it has not been fully funded yet, he wrote.

According to Tellis, even as India looks for ways to realise the commercial promise of the civil nuclear agreement -- an objective that the Biden administration must be congratulated for making its own -- the administration still has another bigger and more consequential task arising out of this accord: addressing the issue of India's nuclear weapons programme in the US grand strategy.

Tellis said the inherited nonproliferation rules and how they are implemented not only prevent India from enjoying the full benefits of the agreement but even more importantly, subvert the overarching objective that drove its negotiation -- assisting India's ascendancy to create the Asian multipolarity that balances China's rise.

"On this count, both the administration and the US Congress are of one mind. Consequently, it is now time for the executive branch to bring its application of the nonproliferation rules in accord with its core strategic goal of building Indian capabilities to effectively resist expanding Chinese power," he asserted.

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.

How the US made Israel the military it is today

Washington has provided over $130 Billion in unrestricted aid and weapons to Tel Aviv, more than any other country, ever.

THALIF DEEN
NOV 27, 2023

As one of America’s closest allies, Israel has remained heavily dependent on the US —politically, economically, and militarily—since its creation in 1948.

US arms supplies, mostly provided gratis, are channeled via US Foreign Military Financing (FMF), Military Assistance Program (MAP) and Excess Defense Articles (EDA).

According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the US has provided more foreign assistance to Israel since World War II than to any other country.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) documented that the United States supplied 79 percent of all weapons transferred to Israel from 2018-2022.

No one else was even close – the next closest suppliers were Germany with 20 percent and Italy with just 0.2 percent.

A Fact Sheet released October 2023, by the US State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, provides a detailed official breakdown on the unrestrained American security assistance to Israel.

Steadfast support for Israel’s security has been a cornerstone of American foreign policy for every U.S. Administration since the presidency of Harry S. Truman.

Since Israel’s founding in 1948, the State Department said, the United States has provided Israel with over $130 billion in bilateral assistance focused on addressing new and complex security threats, bridging Israel’s capability gaps through security assistance and cooperation, increasing interoperability through joint exercises, and helping Israel maintain its Qualitative Military Edge (QME).

This assistance, says the State Department, has helped transform the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) into “one of the world’s most capable, effective militaries and turned the Israeli military industry and technology sector into one of the largest exporters of military capabilities worldwide.”

In the current war, Israel’s overwhelming fire power has resulted in the killings of thousands of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and the destruction of entire cities—mostly with US supplied weapons.

Dr. Natalie J. Goldring, a Visiting Professor of the Practice in the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University, told IPS the October 7 Hamas attacks were horrendous acts and should be condemned as such.

“Even so, the Israeli responses to those attacks have been indiscriminate – intentionally so,” she said.

Two days after the Hamas attacks, Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant declared that Israel would carry out a “complete siege” of Gaza, including blocking the supply of water, food, and fuel, while also stopping the supply of electricity. And Israeli forces have done so, she pointed out.

“The US government bears a special responsibility for the continuing Israeli attacks. It has supplied Israel with massive quantities of military aid and weaponry, and Israel has ignored US restrictions on the use of those weapons”.

This supply of weapons and ammunition allows the Israeli military to continue its indiscriminate attacks in Gaza,” said Dr Goldring, who also represents the Acronym Institute at the United Nations, on conventional weapons and arms trade issues.

“A key first step in reducing the human cost of this war is for the US government to call for an immediate ceasefire. The US government should also halt supplies of weapons and ammunition to Israel, whether from the US itself or from prepositioned stocks elsewhere.”

Since 1983, the United States and Israel have met regularly via the Joint Political-Military Group (JPMG) to promote shared policies, address common threats and concerns, and identify new areas for security cooperation.

According to the State Department, Israel is the leading global recipient of Title 22 U.S. security assistance under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program. This has been formalized by a 10-year (2019-2028) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).

Consistent with the MOU, the United States annually provides $3.3 billion in FMF and $500 million for cooperative programs for missile defense. Since FY 2009, the United States has provided Israel with $3.4 billion in funding for missile defense, including $1.3 billion for Iron Dome support starting in FY 2011.

Through FMF, the United States provides Israel with access to some of the most advanced military equipment in the world, including the F-35 Stealth fighter aircraft.

Israel is eligible for Cash Flow Financing and is authorized to use its annual FMF allocation to procure defense articles, services, and training through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system, Direct Commercial Contract agreements – which are FMF-funded Direct Commercial Sales procurements – and through Off Shore Procurement (OSP).

Via OSP the current MOU allows Israel to spend a portion of its FMF on Israeli-origin rather than U.S.-origin defense articles. This was 25 percent in FY 2019 but is set to phase-out and decrease to zero in FY 2028.

Elaborating further Dr Goldring said: “Unfortunately, the situation in Gaza bears similarities to the documented uses of US weapons by the Saudi-led coalition in attacks on civilians in Yemen”

She said: “Our response should be the same in both cases. These countries have failed to honor the conditions of US weapons transfers, and should be ineligible for further transfers until they are in compliance.”

“US arms transfer decision-making gives too much weight to the judgment of government officials and politicians who frequently fail to consider the full human costs of these transfers,” she argued.

“Earlier this year, the Biden Administration released a new Conventional Arms Transfer policy. They claimed that arms transfers would not be approved when their analysis concluded that “it is more likely than not” that the arms transferred would be used to commit or facilitate the commission of serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights law.”

The actions of the Israeli and Saudi militaries are examples of ways in which this standard is not being met, declared Dr Goldring.

As of October 2023, the United States has 599 active Foreign Military Sales (FMS) cases, valued at $23.8 billion, with Israel. FMS cases notified to Congress are listed here; priority initiatives include: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft; CH-53K Heavy Lift Helicopters; KC-46A Aerial Refueling Tankers; and precision-guided munitions.

From FY 2018 through FY 2022, the U.S. has also authorized the permanent export of over $5.7billion in defense articles to Israel via the Direct Commercial Sales (DCS) process.

The top categories of DCS to Israel were XIX-Toxicological Agents, including Chemical Agents, Biological Agents, and Associated Equipment (this includes detection equipment ((f)), vaccines ((g)-(h)) and modeling software ((i)); IV- Launch Vehicles, Guided Missiles, Ballistic Missiles, Rockets, Torpedoes, Bombs, and Mines; and VII- Aircraft.

Since 1992, the United States has provided Israel with $6.6 billion worth of equipment under the Excess Defense Articles program, including weapons, spare parts, weapons, and simulators.

U.S. European Command also maintains in Israel the U.S. War Reserve Stockpile, which can be used to boost Israeli defenses in the case of a significant military emergency.

In addition to security assistance and arms sales, the United States participates in a variety of exchanges with Israel, including military exercises like Juniper Oak and Juniper Falcon, as well as joint research, and weapons development.

The United States and Israel have signed multiple bilateral defense cooperation agreements, to include: a Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement (1952); a General Security of Information Agreement (1982); a Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (1991); and a Status of Forces Agreement (1994), according to the State Department.

Since 2011, the United States has also invested more than $8 million in Conventional Weapons Destruction programs in the West Bank to improve regional and human security through the survey and clearance of undisputed minefields.

Following years of negotiations with the Palestinians and Israelis, humanitarian mine action activities began in April 2014 – this represents the first humanitarian clearance of landmine contamination in nearly five decades.

Israel has also been designated as a U.S. Major Non-NATO Ally under U.S. law. This status provides foreign partners with certain benefits in the areas of defense trade and security cooperation and is a powerful symbol of their close relationship with the United States.

This piece has been republished with permission from Inter Press Service.

Thalif Deen

An Israeli Air Force F-35I Lightning II “Adir” approaches a U.S. Air Force 908th Expeditionary Refueling Squadron KC-10 Extender to refuel during “Enduring Lightning II” exercise over southern Israel Aug. 2, 2020. While forging a resolute partnership, the allies train to maintain a ready posture to deter against regional aggressors. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Patrick OReilly)

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

Small ‘Hot’ Wars Will Define Cold War II

The US and Soviet Union never came to direct blows but fought for decades through proxies and interventions. Today Ukraine, Syria and Gaza are local conflicts with global implications.

Opinion
Hal Brands, Columnist

BLOOMBERG
November 26, 2023 

The conflict between Israel and Hamas is the most recent round in the long-running struggle between the Jewish state and its enemies. It is a fight to determine whether Iran’s “axis of resistance,” or a loose coalition led by the US, has the edge in a vital region. But this conflict also has a larger global salience: It is one of a series of hot wars at the center of the new cold war playing out around the world.

Cold wars are never as cold — never as peaceful — as their name implies. The US-Soviet struggle from 1947 to 1991 featured dozens of civil wars, proxy wars, and even serious conventional conflicts in places from the Korean Peninsula to Central America. These wars roiled entire regions; in a few cases, they threatened to engulf the globe. Today, a new cold war pits the US and its allies against an axis of Eurasian autocracies. That struggle, too, features some very violent clashes, of which the Israel-Hamas war is the latest, but surely not the last.

In prolonged global contests, these “small wars” can have outsized consequences. They reshape the geopolitical chessboard; they help determine which side will be best prepared if the larger cold war turns hot. They can be sources of strategic advantage, or strategic misery, for the great powers that get involved.

Such conflicts profoundly influenced the course and eventual conclusion of the US-Soviet Cold War. Prevailing in today’s cold war will require navigating the myriad hot wars the US and its friends are likely to encounter along the way.

Only in Europe was the original Cold War truly a “long peace.” Almost everywhere else, it was a cauldron of violence. Civil wars and insurgencies convulsed the Global South. Major conventional wars remade places such as Korea, Vietnam and the Middle East. Superpower involvement in these conflicts — with arms, money or military forces — was omnipresent, even though Moscow and Washington never quite came to blows. The US ultimately lost roughly 100,000 military personnel in the Cold War’s hot wars; all told, the conflicts of the era claimed 20 million lives.

The body counts were ghastly, but unsurprising. Nuclear stalemate fostered stability in superpower relations by giving both sides good reason to avoid all-out war. The division of Europe into coherent, clearly organized blocs meant that red lines in that theater were, eventually, well-understood.

But in a zero-sum contest for geopolitical and ideological mastery, the superpowers — especially the Soviets — simply looked elsewhere for advantage. And the instability that afflicted the developing regions, due primarily to de-colonization and the ideological radicalism of the post-1945 period, created a mass of kindling that Cold War frictions helped ignite.

Significant Hot Conflicts of Cold War I

The Soviet Union and US battled behind the scenes for four decades

Sometimes, Moscow played provocateur in regional conflicts, in hopes of expanding where US red lines were poorly drawn. Joseph Stalin approved North Korea’s invasion of South Korea in 1950, after US officials had left that country outside Washington’s defense perimeter. His successors sought to outflank strong Western positions in Europe and East Asia by supporting insurgents and revolutionaries from Cuba to Vietnam.

In many cases, however, the US ended up resisting, not least because it believed these brushfire wars were tests of strategic commitment. If Washington couldn’t check communist coercion or subversion on the global periphery, why would allies in Europe and East Asia entrust their security to the US?

Hot wars were thus the cut and thrust of the larger superpower competition. They offered opportunities to bleed the enemy, as the Soviet Union did by giving North Vietnam anti-aircraft missiles that devastated American planes and pilots. They were viewed, globally, as tests of capability as well as commitment: If Egypt and Syria defeated Israel in the October War of 1973, Richard Nixon worried, the outcome would be seen as a triumph of Soviet arms over American arms.

Small wars were also laboratories for ideas and weapons that might figure in larger wars. The lessons the Pentagon drew from the October War, about the lethality of modern air defenses and the potential of precision-guided munitions, led to investments in stealth technology, long-range strike weapons and other revolutionary capabilities that would transform the Cold War military balance in America’s favor.

From start to finish, in fact, peripheral conflicts shaped the superpower struggle. The Korean War helped forge the free world: Fears that the North Korean invasion presaged a larger communist assault led Washington to build or fortify a network of alliances around the globe. Two decades later, America’s costly defeat in Vietnam nearly ruptured the free world, while convincing Moscow and its allies that they had the global initiative. There followed communist interventions in Angola, the Horn of Africa, Central America and Afghanistan, which destroyed the superpower détente of the 1970s — and invited a decisive US counteroffensive.

During the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan’s administration punished an overextended Soviet Union by supporting anticommunist insurgents battling Kremlin troops or proxies. The most crucial theater was Afghanistan, where US-backed fighters battered and ultimately banished the Red Army. When Moscow withdrew from that country in 1989, it prefaced the larger geopolitical surrender that brought the Cold War to its end.

Of course, the superpowers weren’t always in control: The proxies they armed, financed and supported had agendas of their own. And if the Cold War’s small wars eventually broke the Soviet Union, they often threatened to escalate disastrously as well.

The Korean War nearly turned into a third world war after a US attempt to reunify the entire peninsula invited Communist China to intervene. The October War eventually produced threats of Soviet military intervention to save Syria and Egypt from defeat — and then a US nuclear alert to call the Kremlin’s bluff. In a tense, bipolar environment, a fire in some obscure location could cause a global conflagration.

In some ways, today’s world looks little like the Cold War. Complex interdependence binds the US and China in an awkward embrace. America’s rivals are not part of a single ideological movement like communism. There is no contemporary equivalent to de-colonization, which wrought such chaos because it gave birth to so many countries in so little time. But cold wars — long, high-stakes struggles in the murky area between war and peace — take many forms.

A cohort of Eurasian autocracies — China, Russia, Iran, North Korea — is cohering around shared opposition to the present international system. These countries have all long contested an American-supported status quo in their respective regions; they seek a future in which US power is blunted and democratic values are further weakened. Now, they are developing stronger connections — military, economic, technological, diplomatic — to one another.

A US-led community of democracies — along with some more-or-less friendly dictators — is facing off against a new revisionist coalition, while non- or multi-aligned states try to avoid committing either way. And as international tensions intensify, wars in sensitive places serve as tests of strength between the two sides.

President Joe Biden has said ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East are part of a larger struggle between democracies and enemies that want to “completely annihilate” them. Russian President Vladimir Putin, for his part, avows that Hamas terrorists battling Israel, and Russian soldiers pillaging Ukraine, are fighting the same American “root of evil,” and the outcomes “will decide the fate of Russia, and of the entire world.” Indeed, hot wars have been shaping this emerging cold war for some time.

Consider the Syrian civil war, the bloodiest and most consequential conflict of the 2010s. That clash was a proxy war in which a regime backed militarily by Russia and Iran, and diplomatically by China, bested a revolt supported by several Middle Eastern governments and, reportedly, the US. It remade the Middle East, mostly to America’s disadvantage.

Iran used the conflict to flood Syria with fighters, deepen its partnership with the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah, and strengthen its position along Israel’s northern frontier.

Russia re-established itself as a Middle Eastern power by showing that it would intervene decisively on behalf of its friends. Moscow had broken the “chain of color revolutions” in places such as Georgia and Ukraine, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu declared: No longer could America and its friends topple governments they disliked.

The Syrian conflict overlapped with another geopolitically salient civil war, in Yemen. The collapse of that country’s government in 2014, and the growing reach of a Houthi movement with ties to Iran, triggered military intervention by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Washington was never enthusiastic about that endeavor — then-deputy crown prince Mohammed bin Salman’s “stupid f-ing ground war,” as one US official termed it ­—­ but for lack of better options, it supported its Gulf partners with weapons and intelligence.

This conflict, too, went badly for Washington: The Houthis still control a sizable swath of Yemen, along with Iranian-provided drones and missiles that they have used against their enemies — and Tehran’s. When a US warship shot down Houthi drones and missiles headed for Israel in October 2023, the incident showed how intertwined events in Yemen have become with the region’s larger contest for power. So did the Houthis’ seizure on Nov. 20 of a British-owned cargo ship they claimed has ties to Israel.

Or consider the war in Ukraine, which began in 2014 and escalated in 2022, when Putin sought to conquer the whole country. Had that attack succeeded, it would have endangered Eastern Europe and restored Russian supremacy in most of the former Soviet Union. It also would have trampled the post-1945 norm against territorial conquest and annexation, creating a precedent other revisionists might exploit. Putin’s war in Ukraine was no local matter: It was meant to upend the larger order, in Europe and globally, that the US anchors.

Yet the invasion failed, in part because Washington and its allies understood these stakes all too well. So they turned Ukraine into Afghanistan-on-steroids, giving Kyiv the money, weapons and intelligence it used to kill vast numbers of Russian troops. The goal, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin candidly explained, was to see Russia “weakened.” Meanwhile, the war was consolidating ties among both advanced democracies on one side and Eurasian autocracies on the other — a reminder of how hot wars can serve as the crucibles in which competing coalitions are forged.

The Israel-Hamas war is part of this pattern. It started 50 years nearly to the day after the October War, and its implications could be just as far-reaching.

Prior to this war, Iran had been trying to surround Israel with well-armed proxy forces. Washington had been trying to assemble a coalition, featuring Israel and Saudi Arabia, to balance Tehran and its allies — an effort Hamas sought to spoil by sparking a bloody war that would polarize the region along Arab-Israeli lines.

The international dimensions of the war have only become more pronounced since Oct. 7. The US has supported Israel with weapons, intelligence and military advice. It has also sought to deter intervention by Iran or Hezbollah, even sending two carrier strike groups to the Eastern Mediterranean, and thereby help Israel destroy Hamas one-on-one.

Yet Hamas’s partners aren’t simply standing by. Tehran has encouraged other proxies to launch violent strikes against US forces in the region. Hezbollah is engaged in a violent tit-for-tat with Israel in the north. Russia has hosted Hamas leaders and amplified the group’s propaganda. Both Moscow and, more subtly, Beijing, are trying to exploit international anger over Israeli tactics in Gaza to make Washington pay a diplomatic price with the Global South. They understand that a war in a tiny strip of territory has much larger significance.

There’s no guarantee that such conflicts will stay contained. In 2018, US forces slaughtered perhaps 200 Russian mercenaries who got too close to an American base in Syria. In Ukraine, there have also been close calls: At one point, a Russian pilot tried, and narrowly failed, to shoot down a British plane over the Black Sea. Iran and its allies are presently working very hard to kill US soldiers; in some cases, they haven’t missed by much. When small wars take on bigger consequences, the potential for escalation is very real.

If history is any guide, the Israel-Hamas is a portent: A volatile, divided world offers too many possibilities for repetition. America can prepare for the challenges such conflicts pose by keeping six lessons in mind.

First, hot wars set the tone for cold wars. They shape alignments in key regions; they reveal the larger military balance; they determine whether aggression will be rewarded or punished. So even localized wars can have a long afterlife. For example, Soviet leaders came away from the Korean War believing their support for a brazen land-grab had backfired, which was why Moscow was subsequently more reticent about trying something like that again.

Ukraine, then, is hardly a sideshow. That war’s outcome will affect how countries around the world assess the balance between the US and its enemies — and how Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping view the prospects for violent revisionism in the future.

Second, use small wars to prepare for — and deter — bigger ones. The lessons America learned from the October War informed concepts and capabilities that transformed the US-Soviet military balance a decade later. Right now, wars in the Middle East and Ukraine are teaching us about the uses of drones and artificial intelligence, the shifting balance between offense and defense, and the possibilities and limits of maneuver warfare in a world of ubiquitous surveillance. No two wars are exactly alike. But the more America mines today’s conflicts for insights, the better it will fare in tomorrow’s trials.

Third, look for opportunities to strengthen coalitions and weaken enemies. Acts of aggression, by rival great powers or their proxies, can deliver the shock that forces defenders of the status quo to lock arms. And when an adversary overextends itself, a shrewd competitor will look for opportunities to intensify the pain. Today, the vindication of Ukrainian sovereignty is surely a prize worth seeking. In a protracted competition with Moscow and its partners, inflicting catastrophic damage on Russia’s army, suppressing its economy and expanding and energizing the Western coalition are prizes greater still.

Supporting local allies relates to a fourth lesson, however, which is that proxies have minds and methods of their own. Intervention by proxy can be a cost-effective way of imposing costs on an enemy, or of simply managing a situation when direct intervention is too dangerous. But proxies find ways of making their patrons sweat. During the 1970s, it was Cuba that often forced the pace of Eastern Bloc intervention in Africa, with results that were ultimately disastrous for the Soviet Union itself. The US, for its part, supported right-wing rulers who battled communism with vicious brutality in Latin America and elsewhere. In a long, draining contest for supremacy, Washington will have good reasons to outsource interventions. But doing so heightens dependence on actors who may not fully share one’s morality — or one’s interests.

Fifth, keeping small wars contained — while exploiting the opportunities they present — requires artful escalation control. Any involvement in localized wars is fraught because it brings the risk of spreading regionally and beyond. On the other hand, restraint may not be the best guarantee of peace, if it persuades the adversary to keep pushing: Witness the limited impact the Pentagon’s occasional pinprick strikes have had recently in stemming Tehran’s bid for American blood. Shaping smaller wars involves successfully coercing one’s adversaries — which requires running risks and threatening serious consequences no less than it requires wise restraint.

That restraint is important, though, because a final lesson is, don’t overcommit. The US did best during the Cold War when it exploited a rival’s excesses. It did worst when its own interventions became all-consuming. Vietnam, where over 58,000 US military personnel were eventually killed, was the tragic exemplar: That conflict weakened free-world positions almost everywhere and ruptured the Cold War consensus it was meant to serve.

There is no mathematical formula for determining how much is too much. If there were, Washington would never get such decisions wrong. But no matter the stakes of a small war, there is always a point at which greater involvement can become destructive to the global ends Washington must keep in sight. In dealing with the hot wars in this new cold war, America’s foremost challenge will be knowing when to get involved — and just as important, when to stop.



By Hal Brands is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and the Henry Kissinger Distinguished Professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.

Bangladesh Arrest Thousands in 'Violent' Crackdown: HRW

November 27, 2023 
Agence France-Presse

Police personnel stand guard in front of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party headquarters in Dhaka on Nov. 19, 2023, during a nationwide strike called by BNP activists. The party said about half of its five million members "face politically motivated prosecution."

DHAKA, BANGLADESH —

Bangladesh has launched a sweeping and violent crackdown on opposition parties to "eliminate competition" ahead of general elections, including arresting almost 10,000 activists, Human Rights Watch said Monday.

As well as the thousands arrested — many from the key Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) — a staggering number also face charges.

According to the BNP, about half of its five million members "face politically motivated prosecution," HRW said.

"The arrests, they are not leaving anyone behind, from senior level to the ground level," one activist told HRW.

Prisons are now at more than double their capacity, the rights group said.

The South Asian nation of around 170 million people holds a general election on Jan.7, with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina eyeing her fourth consecutive term in power.

"Bangladesh authorities are carrying out mass arrests of political opposition in a clear attempt to quash the opposition and eliminate competition ahead of the general elections," HRW said.

New York-based HRW, who called it a "violent autocratic crackdown," said at least 16 people have been killed since protests escalated in October, including two police officers.

 

More than 5,500 people have been injured.

There was no immediate response by the government to the HRW report, but authorities say that those arrested should face justice for a range of violent crimes.

'Extrajudicial killings'

HRW based its report on multiple witness interviews, as well as analysis of videos and police reports.

It said it had found "evidence that security forces are responsible for using excessive force, mass arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, torture, and extrajudicial killings."

Bangladesh is one of the world's largest garment exporters — accounting for around 85% of its $55 billion in annual exports — with many global brands purchasing clothes from its factories.


Motorists watch as Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) activists set fire on a road during clashes with the police in Araihazar, on October 31, 2023. (Photo by Munir Uz Zaman / AFP)


"Diplomatic partners should make clear that the crackdown will jeopardize economic cooperation," HRW said.

Julia Bleckner, senior Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch, said credible elections could not be held under such conditions.

"A free election is impossible when the government stifles free expression and systematically incapacitates the opposition, critics, and activists through arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearance, harassment, and intimidation," Bleckner said.

The BNP on Sunday said at least 16,625 members had been arrested since October.

They include most of its leadership, most notably the BNP's de facto chief Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir.

Prosecutors and lawyers said in the past two weeks at least 526 BNP officials and activists were convicted and sentenced, mostly in absentia, over what the party said were "trumped up" charges.

 

Addressing climate change and racial inequality

Connecting community with the land.

Joanne Paulson / USask2 days ago

• 
  
• 
  

USask alumni Jebunnessa Chapola dives into climate change and its effect on Indigenous and racialized women. Photo courtesy USask

SASKATOON — Dr. Jebunnessa Chapola (PhD) came to Canada from Bangladesh almost two decades ago, a self-described racialized woman who immigrated “from one colonial land to another colonial land.”

Since her arrival, she has dedicated herself to making connections with her own immigrant community, as well as Indigenous, immigrant, and refugee women using various means — including her radio program with Saskatoon’s CFCR community station and through volunteering, such as with the Saskatoon Community Garden.

Now holding a PhD from the University of Saskatchewan (USask), she continues this work at a different level as a post-doctoral fellow with the University of Regina, working under Dr. Margot Hurlbert (PhD), a professor and Canada Research Chair in the Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy (JSGS).

Hurlbert’s work explores the gap between what is needed to address climate change and current policy and behaviour. Hurlbert’s scholarship concerns climate change adaptation and mitigation, energy, Indigenous peoples, water, droughts, floods, water governance, and sustainability.

Following her doctoral dissertation based on her own journey, Chapola is now plunging into the complexity of climate change and its effects on racialized and marginalized women.

Her new research work, entitled Women-led Climate Change Solutions (WCCS): Developing A Policy Guide from Indigenous and Immigrants’ Perspectives, comes at the perfect time. It has helped inform a massive undertaking at JSGS: the Governing Sustainable Municipalities Project.

In turn, the project addresses the Government of Saskatchewan’s goals, which include economic and population growth, Indigenous participation, and climate change strategy.

“What the government is trying to do is reduce carbon and GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions in extracting industries to supply the food, fuel, and fertilizer to serve the world’s needs,” Chapola said. “But more needs to be done.”

“I’m an anti-racist decolonial feminist and that is what my PhD work was about. I am focusing on women-led climate change solutions.”

Chapola’s work dovetails with one of JSGS’s primary project questions: How can municipal sustainability initiatives engage underserved groups, particularly Indigenous peoples, racialized people, LGBTQ2S+ people, and people with disabilities?

The project, detailed in several specific briefs, is based on the premises that sustainable development benefits society, the environment, and the economy; and that municipalities have the authority to undertake and support sustainability initiatives. How these goals can be achieved are at the basis of the project.

Chapola’s study has three related objectives:

To create Women-led Community Climate Solutions Spaces based on equity principles that foster community resiliency to climate change;

To address climate change risks and women’s related vulnerabilities;

To provide recommendations for creating socially inclusive climate policies at local, provincial, and federal levels.

Chapola notes that Indigenous, new immigrant, and refugee women — here and everywhere — are economically more vulnerable to climate change. Simply put, Chapola said, society must connect more closely with the land.

She began her research on how to achieve this goal by collecting the stories of Indigenous, immigrant, and refugee women.

“Indigenous women live close to the land. The way their lives have been impacted by climate change is different from racialized women,” Chapola said.

Chapola hears about the lack of clean, safe drinking water, and how their culture and spirituality are closely connected to the land; but these are not being sufficiently valued.

Most racialized women she has interviewed say climate change has not directly affected their lives because they generally live in cities with safe drinking water and accessible energy. However, Chapola said their migration is often for reasons of climate change, as well as war or other social reasons.

“A lot of factors are involved; but in a simple way, I would say it is high time for us to understand, what is the meaning of land and water? It’s for the betterment of all of us.”

“Learning from Indigenous, new immigrant, and refugee women in our communities is essential if we are going to address climate change and achieve our goals,” Chapola said.

Chapola’s PhD dissertation is entitled ‘A racialized settler woman’s transformative journey in Canada: Building relational accountabilities’ and can be found at: https://harvest.usask.ca/handle/10388/14135.

 

 

From Darfur to Dubai: former refugee to bring voices of the displaced to Cop28

Emtithal Mahmoud, a Sudanese refugee, writer and activist, is preparing to attend the Cop28 climate summit in Dubai this month as part of her mission to raise up overlooked voices. RFI met her during a visit to the Minawao refugee camp in northern Cameroon, where displaced people are experiencing the harsh realities of climate change first-hand.


RFI
Issued on: 25/11/2023 -

Activist and poet Emtithal "Emi" Mahmoud stands in the middle of a circle of people at the Minawao refugee camp in northern Cameroon. 

© Ngala Killian Chimtom / RFI

By: Ngala Killian Chimtom in Minawao

Liatou Habila, a 26-year-old Nigerian refugee in Cameroon, has a broad smile after shaking hands with Emtithal “Emi” Mahmoud.

“I am surprised that she came to see us,” Habila says of the Sudanese-American poet and goodwill ambassador for the United Nations refugee agency UNHCR.

“She is so humble and so nice and everybody likes her,” Habila tells RFI.

The two women met at the Minawao refugee camp in Cameroon’s Far North region, which Mahmoud recently visited.

The activist, who fled Darfur as a toddler and then grew up in the United States, was in the region to speak to displaced people ahead of the Cop28 climate summit, which starts on 30 November.

She says she will be at the talks in Dubai “to lift the voices of refugees” – who have long been left out of discussions on climate change, but increasingly find themselves on its frontlines.

The Bogo camp for internally displaced people in northern Cameroon, which Emtithal Mahmoud also visited. 

© Ngala Killian Chimtom / RFI

Climate displacement

“You see other refugee situations where climate disasters did lead to displacement, because 70 percent of refugees actually come from climate-vulnerable settings, in different countries including Afghanistan, the DRC, Yemen and Syria,” Mahmoud says.

“But from my context specifically, I have experienced that kind of environmental loss at many different levels and many different climates, both in the States and in Sudan and many different areas.”

In Cameroon, the Far North region hosts thousands of displaced people, some from Nigeria and others forced to flee from within the country. Some have fled extreme weather events or conflicts over land and resources aggravated by climate change.

But they can’t escape climate pressures at the Minawao refugee camp.Forced to flee or too poor to leave: how climate change affects refugees
Drought, deforestation

The camp spans some 623 hectares, with temperatures sometimes reaching as high as 40 degrees Celsius. The area has seen regular droughts in recent years, much like many other regions of the Sahel, the semi-arid scrubland that borders the Sahara desert.

This has been made worse in Minawao by the loss of trees, which both refugees and the local population depend on for firewood.

According to the Centre for International Forestry Research, an estimated 80 percent of Cameroonians rely on wood for all their household energy. It estimates that 2.2 million metric tonnes of firewood is burned annually throughout the nation. And with electricity in short supply and domestic gas practically unavailable in remote places like Minawao, firewood is the camp’s primary source of fuel.

The rising demand for firewood is adding to the pressure on Cameroon’s forests, which are already threatened by logging, farming, mining and construction.

Desperate hunt for fuel threatens a once thriving forest reserve in Cameroon

Even as refugees like Habila go further afield in search of firewood, they face the prospect of sexual violence.

“They are sexually abused. They are raped almost every day they step out to look for wood,” said Luka Isaac, a spokesperson for Nigerian refugees at Minawao.

The refugees therefore initiated a tree-planting campaign – not only to help provide fuel, but also to provide shade from the searing Sahelian heat.
Over 50,000 new trees

“We started with just 500 trees,” Luka tells RFI. “With the help of the Cameroon government, the UNHCR and other aid agencies, we are now on more than 50,000 trees.”

Mahmoud sits in the shade of a neem tree taking in the breeze.

“I think what’s so brilliant about the climate solutions here are that they weren’t just offered or led by refugees, they were created by refugees from the outset,” she tells RFI. Cameroon's indigenous Baka sing to save their vanishing forest home

She says she performs her spoken-word poetry because she believes that “if one person hears it and it makes a difference in their lives, if it shifts their perspective about a refugee or a vulnerable person or it makes them see us as more human, if it just makes one person listen a little bit better or see the humanity a little bit more, that makes a huge difference for me”.

The same mission will take her to Cop28, where she hopes to ensure that refugees’ long-ignored voices are heard.

COP28

Scottish faith leaders issue call for climate change action

Faith leaders are urging politicians to ensure the Cop28 climate conference counts, warning that humanity stands "on the brink of untold destruction" without urgent action.

HMMM SAME THING THEY SAID AT COP26

​
By Lucinda Cameron, PA Scotland
Published 27th Nov 2023

They are calling on the UK Government to make paying into a loss and damage fund a key priority at the UN climate talks, which begin later this week in Dubai.

The 11 Scottish faith leaders are calling on the UK Government to commit to making the biggest polluters pay into the fund, so that it urgently delivers support to communities already experiencing climate breakdown, and to provide loss and damage finance in the form of grants not loans.

They are also writing to the leaders of all the main political parties in the UK asking them to use their influence ahead of the global summit and to sign the Global Parliamentarians' Pledge on loss and damage.

Signatories to the letter include representatives of the Church of Scotland, Scottish Catholic Bishops Conference, Hindu Temple of Scotland, Samye Ling Tibetan Buddhist Community, Salvation Army and Scottish Religious Leaders Forum.

In a statement accompanying the letter they say: "The climate crisis is devastating lives and livelihoods across the world, threatening nations and ecosystems and pushing the earth's life support systems to their limits. Without urgent action we are on the brink of untold destruction.

"This is a crisis for all humanity, but it is not experienced equally and not all are equally responsible. Many of the world's poorest nations, who have contributed the least to climate change, are already paying the price of other nations' actions.

"The loss and damage fund agreed in principle at Cop27 was a signal that the world is ready to correct this injustice. It must be enacted if we are to redress historic and current harms."

They recognise that there are "significant" challenges but say that if those in power recognise the urgency, and respond with integrity, humility and humanity, "then there is hope".

The group is also calling on the UK Government to ensure that the money for loss and damage is new and additional to existing climate finance commitments.

The other signatories are representatives of the General Meeting for Scotland (Quakers), Interfaith Scotland, Methodist Church in Scotland, Scottish Episcopal Church and United Reformed Church.

Dr Maureen Seir, director of Interfaith Scotland, said: "Urgent action is needed to reduce emissions as quickly as possible and to help those facing the worst impacts of this crisis, having contributed the least to it."

And Andrew Tomlinson, campaigns and advocacy lead at Christian Aid Scotland, said: "We're already seeing the impact of extreme weather, driven by climate change, on countries least able to deal with it.

"We want to see the leaders of all the richer nations, especially the UK, pushing for action."

A UK Government spokesperson said: "Alongside our international partners, the UK agreed a robust plan for the loss and damage fund.

"The UK played an important role in coming to this historic agreement, and we look forward to its passage at Cop28 which will support continued urgent action tackling loss and damage."

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: "First Minister Humza Yousaf intends to participate in Cop28 in Dubai as an opportunity to underline Scotland's commitment to being a good global citizen, and to making a constructive contribution to addressing the twin crises of climate and biodiversity.

"The Scottish Government will use Cop28 to call on all to urgently step up to address the injustice at the heart of climate change by supporting those communities who are suffering the most but have done the least to cause climate impacts, including through our leadership on loss and damage."

Scottish Labour Environment spokesperson Sarah Boyack said "The climate emergency is already doing immense damage both at home and across the world.

"This is a global crisis that requires a global response, and Scotland must play its role.

"It is absolutely essential that we all do our part not only to stop temperatures rising but also to help countries hit hard by the effects of climate change."

Scottish Liberal Democrat climate emergency spokesman Liam McArthur MSP said: "There is no escaping the truth that wealthier countries have historically done more to cause the climate crisis, while poorer countries and the most marginalised are left to deal with the gravest consequences.

"That is why Scottish Liberal Democrats have put forward proposals that would see energy companies and the UK Government paying into this fund to support all those affected by climate disasters."

Failure is deadly: Vulnerable countries need climate action now, says the IRC ahead of COP28


MEDIA CONTACTS
IRC Global Communications
communications@rescue.org

November 26, 2023 — On the eve of COP28, the International Rescue Committee (IRC) urges global leaders to take urgent climate action that supports countries affected by the dual challenges of conflict and climate change.

Far from being on the periphery of the fight against climate change, these climate-vulnerable, conflict-affected communities like Afghanistan, Somalia and Syria increasingly represent the sharp end of the climate crisis. While these communities only account for 10% of the global population and less than 3% of global carbon emissions, they also account for 60% of global humanitarian need, over 70% of internal displacement, a growing share of extreme poverty, and half of all people affected by natural disasters over the past 3 years. Despite these dire statistics, these same communities are only receiving one-third of the climate financing compared to their stable counterparts.

The IRC’s Climate Action for the Epicenter of Crisis: How COP28 Can Address the Injustices Facing Conflict-Affected Communities lays out the four core areas IRC and its staff and clients in these communities are calling for at COP:Improving risk mapping of conflict-affected communities to target action where it is most needed - with specific commitment to ensure community-level risk maps exist in all 16 climate-vulnerable, conflict-affected countries by the end of 2025;
Investing in innovation, particularly adaptation, resilience and anticipatory actioninterventionsdesigned for conflict settings - such as anticipatory action or seed security - calling on climate finance contributors to deliver 50% of all climate funding to adaptation by 2025, with a particular focus on the 16 conflict- and climate-impacted countries and to commit a minimum of 5% of humanitarian budgets to anticipatory action with a strategy for further expansion by 2030.
Adopting a “people-first” approach to delivery through meaningful non-governmental partnerships- calling on multilateral development banks and vertical climate funds to channel 20% of adaptation financing through non-governmental partners in conflict-affected countries;
Making climate finance more equitable and accessible to adequately resource action - calling on donors to fulfill the $100 billion-per-year climate pledge with “new and additional” financing, and increase the ambition for a new goal set from 2025 starting from a floor of $100 billion.

David Miliband, President and CEO of the IRC:


“This year’s COP must not fail climate-vulnerable states. Negotiations in Dubai must prioritize the distinct challenges faced by conflict-affected, climate-vulnerable countriesthat have been left out of business-as-usual global climate action thus far. Devastating flooding in Pakistan and Libya, drought and the resulting impact on food security in Somalia and Afghanistan all highlight the present danger of inaction.

“But it doesn’t end there. Climate change acts as a threat multiplier, exacerbating existing fractures in fragile societies. The lack of support means injustices in these communities in particular are growing. The litany of warnings issued by humanitarians and climate scientists alike continue ad infinitum: 1.5 billion people could be displaced by 2050 as a result of climate shocks, food insecurity and overall humanitarian needs without sufficient investments in climate resilience. 250,000 additional deaths per year are expected due to climate-induced malnutrition, malaria, and heat stress over the next 25 years - the equivalent of 500 Boeing 747s crashing every year during that same period. Twenty years of progress toward gender equity could be reversed if the impact of climate change on women goes unaddressed.

“Behind a sea of dire statistics is a clarion call. The IRC and the people it represents are calling for a focus on the solutions within our grasp, and the clear opportunity presented by COP28 to make them a reality for millions.

“The recently-released Climate Relief, Recovery, and Peace Declaration is a critical first step, recognizing the unique effects of the climate crisis on fragile and conflict-affected communities and making important calls for scaling up more accessible climate financing, investing in innovative climate adaptation program for these settings, and ensuring women, disability, and youth-led organizations have a seat at the table. But turning this substantive declaration into tangible impact for the communities hit hardest by the climate crisis will require an action plan to go with it. Governments, banks, climate funds and the private sector should endorse the declaration and commit to specific targets on the amount of finance going to these communities, the share going to adaptation, and the accessibility of this finance for non-governmental partners.

“The bar for COP28 to be considered a success is whether it can commit to a new chapter of climate action- accountable to the least prioritized, and the most vulnerable.”

Why Cop28 is an opportunity for India to boost its energy transition

The South Asian country is aiming for 500 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2030

Panels at Bhadla Solar Park in Rajasthan, northern India. Currently, coal powers 70 per cent of India's electricity generation. AFP

Rebecca Bundhun
Mumbai, India
Nov 26, 2023


The Cop28 climate summit, which starts in Dubai on Thursday, is an opportunity for India to boost its efforts in transitioning to renewable energy, industry experts say.

The country’s limitations on moving away from dependence on coal will also come to the fore at the summit, given its rapidly growing energy demands.

“India’s priorities for Cop28 will revolve around building on the positive momentum gained at the recently held G20 [summit in New Delhi], including focusing on tripling renewable energy capacity by 2030, developments in green hydrogen and the need of low-cost finance for energy transition,” says Gautam Mohanka, chief executive at Gautam Solar in New Delhi.

“Additionally, India will focus on accountability and more ambitious climate mitigation plans from the wealthy, developed nations.”

Industry leaders are confident about what India might be able to achieve at Cop28

“As we enter Cop28, India has the opportunity to showcase not only the progress made but also our unwavering dedication to a green and resilient future,” says green energy company Avaada Group’s chairman, Vineet Mittal, who is part of the delegation.

India has been rapidly increasing its green energy capacity – especially solar – as it recognises this as not only a way to cut emissions, but also to boost its energy security and reduce its import bill from fossil fuels.

The country is aiming for 500 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2030. As of July, India had an installed capacity of 176.49 gigawatts, according to official data.

“Realising the 2030 renewable energy target will be a milestone not to be missed if India is to stay on track for the 2070 net-zero goal,” says Anup Garg, founder and director of World of Circular Economy, a company offering sustainability solutions.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi at Cop26 in 2021 pledged India would cut its emissions to net zero by 2070, and renewables would make up half of the country’s energy mix by 2030. The US and EU have committed to becoming carbon neutral by 2050, while China is targeting 2060 for the goal.

India is the fourth-largest emitter of carbon emissions after China, the US and the EU.

The Cop conference this year is seen as particularly crucial as the planet appears to be falling short in its efforts to tackle climate change. The first full global stocktake of the world’s climate targets will be delivered at Cop28.

Efforts by countries so far are insufficient to limit the world’s temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, an initial report on the summit found.


India, as the fifth-largest economy and with the world’s largest population of more than 1.4 billion people, is considered vital when it comes to global climate negotiations.

Irena: 'The future is bright if action is taken today'

“India’s energy demand continues to rise due to the growth in the country’s population and economy in the years ahead,” says Mr Garg.

However, because of these demands and despite pressure from developed nations, India has been resistant to setting a deadline to phase out fossil fuels such as coal.


The country relies on the highly polluting fuel to produce about 70 per cent of its electricity.

Although “India remains one of the fastest growing markets for renewable energy, it still remains largely dependent on coal to meet its growing energy needs”, Mr Mohanka says.

“While India still faces a relatively big challenge with coal dependency within its energy sector, we are quite optimistic about the efforts being made to reduce it,” says Sandiip Bhammer, founder and co-managing partner at Green Frontier Capital, a climate change-focused venture capital fund.

“The government is taking bold steps to phase out old and inefficient coal plants, promote cleaner coal technologies, and invest in carbon capture and storage research.”

The aim is “to balance energy security with environmental sustainability”, he adds. “It’s safe to say that India is committed to a sustainable, low-carbon future, prioritising renewable energy and addressing challenges to achieve this goal.”

For India to be able to lower its reliance on coal, more investment needs to be pumped into renewables and related infrastructure, analysts say.

“India has made very impressive strides in shifting to renewable energy sources, particularly in solar and wind power,” Mr Bhammer says.

“Government policies and incentives have attracted substantial investments, positioning India as a rapidly growing clean energy market globally. Nonetheless, challenges like grid integration, energy storage and intermittency issues persist, indicating the need for ongoing efforts to meet targets and strengthen the reliability of energy infrastructure.”

This will require significant investment.

“The future energy transformation with complete phase out of fossils requires substantial money, so climate finance is the most important challenge,” says Manish Dabkara, chairman and managing director of EKI Energy Services, a carbon-credit developer and supplier.

A key area of focus for India and the success of Cop28 partially falls on negotiations around financing to developing countries, experts say.

“Developed countries need to do much more in finance, technology and capacity building for developing countries,” says Pallavi Das, programme lead at Council on Energy, Environment and Water, a climate think tank.

“Without a clear definition and developed countries not meeting their older targets, the delivery of climate finance is a priority for developing India.”

In 2009, wealthier nations pledged to provide $100 billion per year by 2020 to poorer countries to assist with climate adaptation and mitigation – but they missed this target.

“Negotiators will work this year on developing a post-2025 finance goal, but continued disagreement between developing and developed nations will put the ability and willingness of developing nations to scale up climate mitigation efforts at risk,” a recent report by S&P said.

At Cop28, India plans to push developed countries to become carbon negative by 2050, rather than carbon neutral, Reuters reported last month, citing government officials. This would give emerging market economies more time to use fossil fuels to meet their development needs.

As we enter Cop28, India has the opportunity to showcase not only the progress made but also our unwavering dedication to a green and resilient future
Vineet Mittal, chairman, Avaada Group

India is also unlikely to sign a global pledge to reduce cooling-related emissions, the report said.

There is a lot India can achieve at Cop28.

E-waste recycling company Attero Recycling’s chief executive Nitin Gupta, who will be attending the summit, says he sees this year’s conference as “transitioning towards more execution, while Cop27 was more about strategising”.

“As a business, we strongly believe in a circular economy,” Mr Gupta says.

Biofuels, which are produced from renewable sources, will also receive more attention this year, following the launch of the Global Biofuel Alliance at the G20 summit in September, according to Ashvin Patil, founder and director of Biofuels Junction.

“At Cop28, India's commitment to integrating biofuels into its national energy strategy is expected to play a significant role in its approach to addressing climate change and meeting its environmental commitments,” he says.

India’s youngest participant at Cop28, Prasiddhi Singh, an 11-year-old environmental activist, says the country’s task now is to “balance economic growth and environmental stewardship”. She plans to call for collective action to work towards “a sustainable future”.

Updated: November 27, 2023

Dubai climate conference ‘COP28’ this week; over 200 countries invited. Details

ByManjiri Chitre
Nov 27, 2023 01:03 PM IST

COP28 will take place from November 28 to December 12 in Dubai under the presidency of the UAE.

After a year full of devastating extreme and record-shattering weather conditions across the globe, world leaders are set to gather for the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference, or Conference of the Parties (COP28) this week on a mission to curb climate change. The COP28 will take place from November 28 to December 12 under the presidency of the UAE.

The COP28 summit is being hosted by the UAE. (CREDIT: Reuters)

What is COP28 and why is it important?

COP28 is the 28th annual United Nations climate meeting where leaders across the world meet and discuss ways and measures to limit and prepare for climate change. The ‘COP’ stands for ‘Conference of Parties’ - referring to those parties who signed up to the original UN climate agreement in 1992. The conferences are of significant importance as they are intended for the governments to agree on policies to limit global temperature rises and adapt to impacts associated with climate change.

Read more: Cause and Effect | At COP28, world leaders are at a crossroads

Notably, the 21st session of the COP (COP21) led to the Paris Agreement, which mobilised global collective action to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels by 2100 and to act to adapt to the already existing effects of climate change.


COP28 in UAE is a controversial subject

The UAE is one of the top 10 oil-producing nations in the world. Oil, being a fossil fuel, becomes one of the main causes of climate change because it releases planet-warming greenhouse gases during its production. The UAE is also one of the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world, due to its very hot and humid climate. Without a reduction in emissions, wet-bulb temperatures in the region are expected to cross 35°C (95°F) for a prolonged period of time by the 2070s.

Read more: What do top emitters want from the global stocktake at Cop28?

However, the UAE has been making efforts to reduce emissions in different ways across several sectors of its economy including - promoting organic and hydroponic agriculture, building the Etihad Rail, and reducing waste. The Middle Eastern country has also pledged to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2050. It was also the first country in the region to sign the Paris Agreement.

What will be discussed during the conference?

According to reports, this year's COP28 is expected to stress on the importance of collective action to stop climate change and the critical role of finance in the low-carbon transition. It is also likely to focus on delivering money for climate action from richer to poorer countries.

Who is invited to COP28?

Delegates from nearly 200 countries - over 70,000 people - are expected to attend the conference this week, in what could be the largest United Nations climate summit ever. Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be traveling to Dubai from November 30 to December 1 to attend the World Climate Action Summit - the high-level segment of COP28. Other leaders including UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, and Pope Francis have also confirmed their attendance. However, US President Joe Biden will not be attending.

Dr Sultan Al Jaber, Cop28 President-designate and UAE Minister of Industry and Advanced Technology, speaks at the opening ceremony of Pre-Cop28 in Abu Dhabi. All photos: Chris Whiteoak / The National