Washington, Dec 26 (NationPress) Newly released US diplomatic records disclose that India was instrumental in formulating the Paris climate agreement. The documents indicate that New Delhi played a crucial role in pushing for a non-binding global accord while ensuring that it could maintain its growth trajectory within a universal climate framework.

The records, unveiled by the National Security Archive earlier this month on the tenth anniversary of the Paris Agreement, consist of internal US communications and negotiation documents from 2014 and 2015. They demonstrate that US officials viewed India as both essential and challenging.

Washington recognized that no credible global climate agreement could exist without India. However, US negotiators aimed to dismantle the longstanding divide between developed and developing nations that India depended on during climate negotiations.

A position paper from February 2014 stated that the United States would “not endorse a bifurcated approach” based on classifications from 1992.

This paper argued that such distinctions were “neither rational nor feasible in the post-2020 landscape,” referencing shifts in emissions and economic advancement. The formulation had a direct impact on nations like India, whose climate diplomacy was built upon principles of equity and historical accountability, according to these declassified records.

India countered through coalitions. The documents frequently mention BASIC — Brazil, South Africa, India, and China — as well as the Like-Minded Developing Countries group. These collectives opposed legally binding emissions targets and sought greater acknowledgment of developmental priorities.

US officials took these alliances seriously. In internal memos and cables, they cautioned that India and China, working in unison, could obstruct consensus if pressured toward a legally binding treaty. One late-stage cable noted the “emergence of G77 and China as a unified bloc,” underscoring the negotiating leverage held by developing nations.

This leverage ultimately influenced the final agreement.

Instead of a treaty imposing binding emissions reductions, the United States endorsed a structure based on nationally determined contributions. In this model, each nation sets its own objectives, which are reported and reviewed but not enforced through international law.

This strategy allowed the US to avoid the Senate, where any binding treaty would likely face opposition. For India, it sidestepped mandatory emissions limitations that could hinder development.

A cable from March 12, 2015, from then Secretary of State John Kerry, clarified the US stance. Kerry cautioned that openly advocating for a “legally binding agreement” could be “misinterpreted by countries” and trigger Senate ratification, which could jeopardize the deal.

India capitalized on this limitation.

By resisting binding commitments and aligning with China and other developing nations, India helped secure a flexible framework. This framework permitted India to propose a climate pledge centered on emissions intensity rather than absolute reductions.

US cables meticulously tracked India’s actions. Officials consistently remarked on the necessity of India submitting its intended nationally determined contribution by mid-2015 to sustain momentum toward Paris. The timing and substance of India's contribution were significant, as they indicated that major developing economies would participate in the deal — but on their own conditions.

The documents also reveal that India was more than just a climate participant. US negotiators feared that India could link climate discussions with trade demands. One State Department document established a clear “redline” against allowing climate negotiations to restrict US trade policies, warning that “India, Argentina, and other Parties” might attempt to leverage climate discussions to advocate for rules beneficial to developing nations. Washington firmly stated it would not accept that.

Despite these tensions, the final Paris Agreement reflected India's fundamental priorities. The agreement established a collective temperature target, mandated transparency and reporting from all nations, but steered clear of legally binding emissions reductions, preserving national discretion.

For India, this meant entering a universal climate framework without compromising on its development space. For the United States, it resulted in a deal that could be executed through executive action.

A decade later, the declassified records illustrate that the Paris Agreement was not merely imposed on India. It was not a simple concession either; it was an outcome negotiated through India's defiance, coalition dynamics, and strategic patience.

India was instrumental in making the Paris Agreement feasible while ensuring that it did not impede its growth trajectory.