Not A Retreat: What India’s COP33 Decision Says About Its Climate Diplomacy
India’s withdrawal from hosting the UN Climate Change Conference COP33 signals a strategic shift toward action-led climate leadership while reaffirming commitments under the Paris Agreement.
Published : April 17, 2026 at 8:55 PM IST
New Delhi: India’s decision to withdraw from hosting the UN Climate Change Conference COP33 in 2028 is less a retreat from climate responsibility and more a recalibration of how New Delhi wants to engage with the global climate process.
While confirming the move during his weekly media briefing here on Friday, External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal underscored that India remains fully committed to its obligations under the Paris Agreement, signalling that the withdrawal is political and strategic rather than environmental in nature.
“Yes, India has withdrawn,” Jaiswal said. “There are several issues that were taken into account. But India remains fully committed to meeting its climate change commitments. As you know, we are one of the G20 countries which has fully met its Paris commitments. And we continue to build on our green agenda and at the same time see how best we can foster greater climate change action worldwide along with our international partners, including through International Solar Alliance and other such initiatives that we have undertaken.”
The United Nations Climate Change Conferences are yearly conferences held in the framework of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). They serve as the formal meeting of the UNFCCC parties - the Conference of the Parties (COP) - to assess progress in dealing with climate change, and beginning in the mid-1990s, to negotiate the Kyoto Protocol to establish legally binding obligations for developed countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.
Starting in 2005, the conferences have also served as the “Conference of the Parties Serving as the Meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol” (CMP); also, parties to the convention that are not parties to the protocol can participate in protocol-related meetings as observers. From 2011 to 2015, the meetings were used to negotiate the Paris Agreement as part of the Durban platform, which created a general path towards climate action. Any final text of a COP must be agreed upon by consensus.
India’s decision to step back from hosting COP33 in 2028 is diplomatically significant not because it signals retreat from climate action, but because it subtly reshapes how New Delhi wants to position itself in the global climate architecture.
According to Uttam Kumar Sinha, Senior Fellow at the Manohar Parrikar Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) and an expert on climate change issues, there could be several reasons as to why India decided to withdraw from hosting the COP33 Summit in 2028.
“India must have taken into consideration the geopolitical dynamics and the prevailing uncertainty,” Sinha told ETV Bharat. “Organising COP is a massive exercise. It is not like hosting a G20 or BRICS summit. Around 180-185 countries from across the world participate in COP.”
Hosting a COP summit is not merely a logistical exercise. It requires multi-year diplomatic preparation, massive financial outlay, bureaucratic focus, and alignment with a global climate negotiation process that is increasingly contentious between developed and developing countries.
By withdrawing, India is signalling that it does not see immediate strategic value in investing scarce diplomatic bandwidth into chairing a process where outcomes are often blocked by developed nations’ reluctance on finance, loss and damage, and equity.
In other words, India prefers to influence the climate debate from outside the chair rather than be constrained by the responsibilities of the chair. “India’s decision has been dictated by pragmatic and realistic thinking,” Sinha said. “But the statement (of Jaiswal) makes it very clear that India has met its commitments of Paris 2015.”
The 2015 Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty adopted by 195 parties (COP21) to limit global warming to well below 2°C, preferably to 1.5°C, compared to pre-industrial levels. It requires nations to submit updated national climate plans (NDCs) every five years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and strengthen climate resilience.
Meanwhile, over the past decade, many developing countries have become frustrated with the COP process under the UNFCCC. This is because of repeated failure of developed countries to deliver $100 billion in climate finance, slow movement on loss and damage funding, pressure on developing economies to accelerate transitions without adequate support, and increasing attempts to rewrite “equity” principles of the Paris framework.
By stepping away from hosting, India avoids being the face of a process that many in the Global South view as increasingly imbalanced. This allows India to retain credibility as a spokesperson of developing nations without being tied to the procedural frustrations of COP negotiations.
Sinha pointed out to the fact that the US is playing hard and President Donald Trump has indicated that he will pull his country out of the Paris commitments. “India is a frontline voice in the fight against climate change,” he said. “It has to sharpen the voice of the developing countries and emerging economies.”
He stated that India is a part of the BASIC bloc of countries within the COP. The BASIC group comprising Brazil, South Africa, India, and China was formed on November 28, 2009, to act jointly as a bloc in international climate change negotiations. They represent a collective, influential voice among developing nations under the UNFCCC framework.
“These countries represent the Global South,” Sinha said. “India has to take the lead along with China.” However, according to Harjeet Singh, climate activist and Founder Director of the Satat Sampada Climate Foundation, by pulling out of hosting the COP33 Summit, India has missed out on a strategic opportunity to talk about its climate change-related actions.
In a statement that he had issued following reports about India’s decision, and which he shared with ETV Bharat, Singh expressed the view that, having proven it can green its economy at a record pace, India has now forfeited the home stage to showcase its renewable energy triumphs, electric mobility revolution, and more.
“By stepping back, New Delhi also loses a critical platform to champion the Global South - failing to replicate the leadership of its G20 presidency at a time when the global climate narrative must be framed around the needs of the developing world,” Singh stated. “COP33 should have been the forum where India demanded accountability for historical emissions, ensuring that a just transition to a green economy doesn’t come at the expense of energy access for the world’s most vulnerable.”
Singh also shared the letter sent by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change to Syed Haidar Shah, Chair of the UN Regional Group of Asia-Pacific States, on April 2, informing about India’s decision.
“The Government of India, following a review of its commitments for the year 2028, has decided to formally withdraw its candidature to host the 33rd Session of the Conference of the Parties,” the letter states. “India remains committed to the continued success of the UNFCCC and will continue to engage constructively with the international community to advance global climate action.”
Put together, India's withdrawal from hosting COP33 is not a retreat from climate leadership. It is a way to preserve the Global South's credibility and a signal that climate governance must become more equitable. India is choosing to be a climate doer rather than a climate host.
Read More
