India’s COP30 Delay Draws Global Concern Over Climate Action

Published: 21 November 2025 Friday. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

As the COP30 climate summit unfolds in the Amazonian host city of Belém, global attention has turned sharply toward India, the world’s third-largest carbon emitter, and the only major economy still holding back its updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). The delay has prompted mounting questions from diplomats, environmental groups, and analysts who fear that the world cannot meet its climate goals without decisive action from large emerging economies.

Under the Paris Agreement, all member states must submit updated climate plans every five years, outlining how they intend to cut emissions, shift to cleaner energy, and contribute to global mitigation efforts. These updated NDCs, referred to as NDC3 in this cycle, were due in February 2025. But after almost all countries missed the deadline, the UN granted an extension to September. Even with the extension, nearly 70 nations—including India—failed to comply on time.

So far, 120 of the 196 UNFCCC members have submitted their updated pledges. India, even though deeply involved in climate negotiations and often vocal about developed countries’ responsibilities, remains a notable outlier. The delay has raised concerns because international auditors and scientific assessments now warn that global emission reductions remain dangerously inadequate. According to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), emissions need to fall by 35% by 2035 to align with the Paris 2°C pathway—and by 55% to stay within the safer 1.5°C threshold. But current national pledges would reduce emissions by only around 12%.

UNEP’s emissions gap report paints an even grimmer picture, warning that the world is still heading toward 2.8°C of warming this century unless major emitters significantly step up their commitments. Against this backdrop, India’s silence has become a source of both diplomatic frustration and speculative debate.

India has offered no official explanation for missing the deadlines. But statements from senior officials, particularly Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav, suggest that the country’s strategy may be rooted in a long-standing disagreement between developing and developed nations. For decades, India has argued that wealthy industrialised countries bear the greatest historical responsibility for climate damage and must therefore lead on emissions reductions while also providing substantial financial support to poorer nations.

In an opinion piece published a week before the summit opened, Yadav argued that the world has spent too long negotiating and not enough time acting. “For too long, the world has been caught in a cycle of negotiations, while the planet’s distress signal grows louder,” he wrote. “While dialogue is important, action is imperative.”

At COP30, Yadav expanded on this message, insisting that developed countries “must reach net zero far earlier than current target dates and deliver new, additional and concessional climate finance at a scale of trillions, not billions.”

His remarks reflect a broader sentiment shared by the developing world, which says that submitting ambitious NDCs is meaningless unless accompanied by massive financial and technological assistance. Climate finance remains deeply contentious. At COP29 in Azerbaijan, developing nations reacted angrily when wealthy countries proposed annual climate financing of $300bn by 2035—far short of the trillion-plus dollars poorer nations say they require. Critics also say the proposal lacks clarity, transparency, and guarantees that finance will not take the form of burdensome loans from private institutions.

Western delegates, meanwhile, have pushed back, insisting that countries like India and China—now major global economic powers—should also contribute to the global climate finance pool. Without naming names, European climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra pointed out that some emerging economies have a GDP per capita “far higher than a vast majority” of EU member states.

India, however, argues that it has already delivered tangible results and deserves recognition rather than pressure. It highlights having achieved 50% non-fossil electricity capacity years ahead of its 2030 target. While praised internationally, this success has not softened concerns over India’s continued reliance on coal.

Despite progress in renewable energy expansion, coal remains the backbone of India’s power sector, supplying roughly 75% of the country’s electricity. Climate Action Tracker, which monitors global climate policies, rates India’s actions as “highly insufficient” to meet the Paris 1.5°C target and says India must dramatically reduce its coal share to below 20% by 2035.

A new report released during COP30 by GermanWatch echoes similar concerns. India dropped 13 places in the Climate Change Performance Index, largely because it lacks a coal phase-out timeline and continues to auction new coal blocks. The report bluntly states that India’s national energy pathway “is still anchored in coal.”

Recent UN data shows India recorded the world’s highest year-on-year rise in emissions in 2024, surpassing even China. While China remains India’s closest ally on climate diplomacy, Beijing has already submitted its updated NDC, leaving India increasingly exposed to criticism.

These concerns intersect with a broader debate now dominating COP30: whether the summit should produce the world’s first formal roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels entirely. Although many countries—especially island nations already suffering climate damage—strongly support such a roadmap, India fears any commitment that might constrain its development goals or undermine energy security.

By announcing that India will only submit its updated NDC by December, Yadav has effectively bought Delhi time. But the delayed submission also signals that India is negotiating hard for financial guarantees and recognition of the developmental challenges facing low- and middle-income countries.

India’s position reflects a complex balancing act. It must satisfy the expectations of its billion-plus citizens who need affordable energy, maintain economic growth to reduce poverty, and simultaneously meet global demands for more ambitious climate action. In addition, India’s government is acutely aware of international optics. Submitting an NDC perceived as too weak would invite criticism; submitting one too ambitious without corresponding financial support could undermine domestic economic priorities.

Meanwhile, other developing nations are watching India closely. Many see India as their de-facto leader in negotiations with richer countries. If India ultimately submits a plan with stronger targets, it may inspire others. If it holds firm and demands better climate finance before committing, it may motivate other nations to follow suit.

For now, much of the criticism directed at India focuses on its growing emissions and coal-heavy energy system. Whether these criticisms influence India’s final NDC remains to be seen. What is certain is that in a summit already marked by heightened tension, political posturing, and urgent warnings from climate scientists, India’s eventual decision will carry significant weight.