Realpolitik and Green Transition

India’s Green Energy Transition

• Non-uniform national transition: State-led variations.
• Tension: Green energy drivers vs. trade policy.
• Imbalance: Realpolitik vs. sustainable development.

Green Electrification

• Core of transition: Shift to clean, non-carbon energy.
• Dependence: Electrification of transport, industry, buildings, and homes.
• Joint responsibility: Center and states due to concurrent subject.

Progress and Challenges

• Target: 50% energy from renewables by 2030, 500 GW capacity.
• MNRE achievement: Exceeded solar generation target by 25% in 2023.
• Inter-ministerial cooperation: Ministries and agencies working together.
• Limitations: Inadequate transmission, lack of grid-scale energy storage.
• Financial constraints: Limited green finance, dearth of long-term capital.

State Performance

• Varied pace: Different states at different stages of transition.
• Leaders: Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Odisha, Delhi due to policy, demographics, and OEMs.
• Laggard: Haryana despite supportive policies, lacks implementation machinery.
• Challenges: Financially strained states like Rajasthan struggle with incentives.

Trade and Climate Policy

• National interest vs. trade: Dilemma in clean energy market.
• China’s dominance: Cheap, high-quality solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries.
• Trade-off: Accelerate green transition vs. overdependence on China.
• Dual challenge: Sustainability vs. security, sustainability vs. growth.
• Solution: Balance sustainability, national security, and economic growth.

Conclusion

• Ethical dilemma: Global warming, human and economic costs.
• Governance challenge: Rigid, self-serving nationalisms hinder progress.

 

 

The Rawalpindi Factor

Introduction

• End of ambiguity: India’s decision to abrogate Article 370 in 2019 ended the open-ended status of Jammu and Kashmir.
• Persistent issue: The Kashmir issue remains a part of the India-Pakistan conflict.

The International Dimension

• UN involvement: India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948, leading to international involvement.
• Shimla Agreement and its aftermath: Pakistan disregarded the Shimla Agreement and intensified efforts to internationalize the issue.
• Nuclear factor: The threat of nuclear escalation linked Kashmir to global concerns about proliferation.
• India’s success: Delhi reduced the global salience of the Kashmir issue over time.

Bilateralizing the Issue

• Focus on bilateralism: India shifted focus to bilateral talks with Pakistan in the 1990s.
• Musharraf era efforts: A significant attempt was made to find a solution during 2004-07.
• Post-2019 scenario: India renegotiated terms of engagement with Pakistan on Kashmir.

India’s Strategic Gains

• International isolation of Pakistan: India successfully countered Pakistan’s efforts to internationalize the issue.
• Support from key players: Support from the US, France, UAE, and Saudi Arabia strengthened India’s position.
• India’s rising stature: India’s growing economic power contributed to its enhanced diplomatic standing.

Pakistan’s Challenges

• Internal divisions and economic weakness: Pakistan’s internal problems and economic difficulties reduced its leverage.
• Diplomatic isolation: Pakistan’s rigid stance on Kashmir limited its diplomatic options.

Conclusion and Way Forward

• Persistent threat: While India has gained an advantage, the Kashmir issue remains a potential flashpoint.
• Focus on internal reconciliation: India should prioritize reconciliation efforts within Kashmir.
• Counter cross-border terrorism: Addressing cross-border terrorism is crucial.
• Engage with Pakistan: Delhi should continue to engage with different factions within Pakistan.