Developed nations must meet legal climate finance obligations: India at COP30

The 30th UN Climate Conference (COP30) opened on 10 November in the Amazonian city of Belém, Brazil, under mounting pressure from activists, political absences and fresh disputes over climate finance.

Representing both the BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) and the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC) blocs, India reaffirmed its commitment to multilateralism and equity in global climate action, insisting that developed nations must finally deliver on their legal obligations to fund, equip and support developing countries in addressing the climate crisis.

India’s national statement at the opening plenary was delivered by Dinesh Bhatia, ambassador of India to Brazil, on behalf of Union environment minister Bhupender Yadav. The country’s negotiating team also includes Amandeep Garg, additional secretary at the ministry of environment, forest and climate change, serving as India’s lead negotiator.

Speaking on behalf of the BASIC and LMDC groups, India warned that climate finance remains the single greatest barrier to enhanced ambition under the Paris Agreement. It called for a clear, universally accepted definition of climate finance and for scaled-up, predictable public funding for adaptation, stressing that such finance must increase fifteen-fold to meet the needs of billions of vulnerable people who have contributed least to global warming but face its gravest consequences.

A summit without its senior leaders

The start of COP30 was marked by the absence of senior leaders from major economies. Neither US President Donald Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping, nor Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi attended in person. Their absence underscored a fading sense of political urgency around global climate diplomacy, even as scientists warn that the 1.5 °C threshold could be breached within the decade.

That threshold represents the internationally agreed limit to global temperature rise above pre-industrial levels; breaching it would sharply increase the risks of catastrophic and irreversible impacts such as extreme heatwaves, sea-level rise and biodiversity collapse.

The resulting leadership vacuum has left negotiators grappling with the most contentious questions — particularly who bears the cost of adaptation and mitigation in the developing world — without the visible political impetus that often drives breakthrough moments at climate summits.

Protests boil over outside venue

Outside the heavily secured conference venue, thousands of demonstrators — indigenous activists, youth groups and environmental campaigners — took to Belém’s humid streets demanding stronger commitments from wealthy nations. Many accused developed countries of “green-washing” their pledges and erecting new trade barriers that shift the costs of decarbonisation onto poorer economies.

Tensions escalated when a group of protesters attempted to breach perimeter barriers near the main entrance. Witnesses reported a brief scuffle between demonstrators and security personnel, with activists pushing against metal barricades and chanting slogans such as “climate justice now” and “honour the pledge”. Security forces intervened using crowd-control measures, though the confrontation ended without major injury.

Finance, technology and “climate protectionism”

Inside the halls, the tone was equally tense. India and its LMDC allies reminded the conference that Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement places a binding legal obligation on developed countries to provide financial resources to developing ones. They pressed for the removal of intellectual-property and market barriers that hinder the transfer of clean technologies and slow the global energy transition.

India also issued a warning against the growing threat of unilateral climate-related trade measures, such as the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).

Such measures, it argued, risk morphing into “climate protectionism” and violate Article 3.5 of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which prohibits trade restrictions disguised as environmental policy.

Bolivia, speaking for the LMDC bloc, formally requested the UN climate body include this issue on the COP30 agenda. Yet once again, the topic — first raised at COP29 — has been deferred to informal consultations under Brazil’s presidency, alongside unresolved debates over Article 9.1 implementation, the 1.5 °C ambition gap, and transparency of national data.

Revisiting COP29 — same concerns, still unaddressed

At COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the same concerns about climate finance resurfaced. Negotiators agreed to raise the global financing goal for developing countries to US$300 billion annually by 2035 — but many nations, including India, criticised the figure as woefully inadequate given the scale of adaptation needs.

The fact that COP30 is once again dominated by disputes over finance highlights how little progress has been made in turning those promises into real, disbursable funds.

The equity question

India reiterated that the architecture of the Paris Agreement must not be altered, and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC) remains its foundation. Developed nations, it said, must not only reach net-zero emissions earlier but also invest in negative-emission technologies and finally honour their long-delayed financial and technological commitments.

As COP30 entered its middle stage, it was clear that the fault lines between the Global North and South remain as entrenched as ever. With world leaders absent and protestors spilling into the streets of Belém, the summit opened under a familiar yet deepening shadow: who will pay for the planet’s survival — and will the money ever arrive?

With agency inputs