India and the New Geopolitics of Climate Cooperation

Download Article

Featured Experts:

	Arunabha Ghosh Former CEO, Council on Energy, Environment and Water
	Jhalak Aggarwal Programme Lead for Climate Cooperation, CEEW

The past 11 years of record-breaking global temperatures are collectively the hottest humanity has ever measured, according to the World Meteorological Organization's flagship report. Countries, rich or poor, are being lashed by deadly floods, storms and collapsing ecosystems. During the summer of 2026, wildfires have torn through Spain and France, forcing more than 300,000 people to evacuate their homes.  Record heat has hit parts of the United States and the UK. The monsoon crisis has deepened with floods in the Indian states of Assam, Kerala and Chhattisgarh. In China, a series of extreme weather events have majorly affected Guangxi, Guizhou and Hunan. Looking ahead, a strong El Niño is expected to intensify, leading to a further increase in temperatures and changes in rainfall patterns.

These weather events carry immense health and economic impacts on lives and livelihoods at a time when the very foundations of multilateral cooperation are rapidly eroding. The United States has (once again) pulled out of the Paris Agreement.  Rich countries have failed to raise their ambitions and keep their financial promises. And a widening vortex of conflict, surrounding the Strait of Hormuz, Ukraine and elsewhere, has become an impediment to global climate consensus. Meanwhile, countries are racing ahead to dominate the global clean-energy supply chain, fueling serious economic and political strains that undermine incentives to cooperate. It turns out that geopolitics is as unpredictable as the weather.

The world is undergoing structural shifts; climate action was once driven primarily to protect the planet but now other motives are even greater, like power, policy, production and profits. The challenge now is ensuring this global pivot unfolds in a cooperative and equitable fashion.

So, what are the new geopolitics of climate cooperation?

International climate action is no longer guided by the predictable rules of traditional diplomacy. Today, it is shaped by wars, trade rivalries, debt crises, energy insecurity, rollbacks of climate cooperation and fierce technological competition. Recent developments illustrate this clearly. The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism is reshaping global trade architecture. China’s restrictions on exports of critical minerals are exposing strategic vulnerabilities of the clean-energy supply chains. The conflict along the Strait of Hormuz has triggered a global gas and fertilizer crisis, reversing decades of progress in clean cooking. Meanwhile, the rising debt burden on developing countries is crowding out climate investments and constraining fiscal space for transition.

The result is a fragmented climate order in which the older consensus — rich countries acting first and financing others — is fading. High emitters increasingly question how much of the burden to cut emissions should fall on them, pointing to rising emissions in industrializing countries. Fossil-dependent economies cite economic concerns, energy security and undelivered climate finance, and the vulnerable communities experiencing catastrophic impacts seek accountability and compensation that is absent.

Climate diplomacy is rapidly becoming more about securing economic sovereignty, industrial capacity, competitiveness and strategic resilience. However, this does not mean that momentum towards international climate action has stalled entirely. For instance, nationally determined contributions (NDCs) have proven to be vital tools to translate international ambition into concrete, country-led plans and investments. India’s latest NDC exemplifies this by sending a strong signal for addressing domestic concerns like energy security alongside raising climate ambition. Its target of 60% share of non-fossil electricity capacity in 2035 balances decarbonization with the affordability needs of hundreds of millions of citizens.

Recent developments in technology and diplomacy are also opening up space to operate. Almost everywhere, renewable power is now cheaper to build and operate than fossil fuel plants. After nearly two decades of negotiations, the High Seas Treaty came into force to protect ocean life beyond national borders. And most recently, the United Nations General Assembly formally backed a landmark International Court of Justice advisory opinion that said countries have an obligation under international law to reduce emissions that are driving the climate crisis. This demonstrates that hope and cooperation can continue despite geopolitical fragmentation. Therefore, the new geopolitics of climate diplomacy is not about choosing between competition and collaboration – it is recognizing that the transition will be shaped by them both and ensuring that cooperation remains strong enough to prevent competition from consuming the very future we are trying to secure.

Reimagining climate cooperation in a multipolar world

To achieve this balance and make international action work in a divided landscape, climate governance must shift toward five practical priorities.

First, cooperative initiatives by countries, states, cities and businesses must define robust structures for effective delivery. Effective climate governance relies on "hybrid multilateralism"—a approach that pairs traditional government treaties with non-state partnerships (like cities and businesses) so that real-world action keeps up with diplomatic promises. CEEW research finds that out of the 203 cooperative climate initiatives launched since 2015, only 5% have accomplished their stated goals. Nearly a fifth of all initiatives are either stalled or inactive. The tools, partnerships and narratives of the past decade are no longer sufficient. Governments must modernize and adapt cooperative models to support COPs as a delivery driver and accountability space, supporting the Action Agenda and coalitions that match the shifting global order. Navigating this next phase requires defined structures—goals, targets, organization, and monitoring—and a more pragmatic, region and issue-specific approach, rather than a catch-all multilateral grouping that is politically attuned. The International Solar Alliance is one such successful example combining targets ($1 trillion in solar investment, 1,000 gigawatts of installed capacity and clean energy access for 1 billion people by 2030) with practical mechanisms on finance, technology, capacity-building and cross-border energy cooperation. The next phase of climate diplomacy will reward coalitions that can implement, not just negotiate.

Second, building “coalitions of the doing"— targeted, results-oriented groupings that bypass diplomatic gridlock to accelerate implementation. Agile coalitions must target specific challenges. The Global Biofuels Alliance, launched by India alongside 19 countries including the U.S. and Brazil, is a case in point — broadening the global clean energy conversation beyond just solar and hydrogen, and opening up new climate-aligned trade routes. The Australia-India Critical Minerals Partnership, meanwhile, helps secure lithium for India’s electric vehicle ambitions while strengthening trusted supply chains across the Indo-Pacific. The Mangrove Alliance for Climate, which includes Indonesia and Australia among many other nations, demonstrates how shared ecosystems can drive nature-based cooperation across borders. Meanwhile, the International Solar Alliance, co-founded by India and France, continues to pool capital and technology for scaling renewables. More recently,  India and Sweden signaled a plan to expand and grow engagement for LeadIT and called for a new four-year phase, Lead IT 3.0, elevating cooperation for a global industry transition. These models have a better chance of success because they are voluntary, focused and built to deliver within political cycles.

Third, embed climate resilience in domestic economic strategies. Energy security, jobs, and clean power must go hand in hand. India is boosting clean energy not just as a climate imperative but as an energy security one, building a future-ready economy. Clean energy is creating new jobs, anchoring industrial growth and cutting costs. CEEW research finds that India could attract $4.1 trillion in cumulative green investments and create 48 million full-time equivalent  jobs across 36 green value chains from sustainable mobility, battery recycling and renewable energy to agroforestry, mangrove plantations, seaweed cultivation and sustainable forest management. This highlights a far broader opportunity across energy transition, circular economy, bio-economy and nature-based solutions, representing a defining green economic opportunity for India’s journey toward developed country status and learnings for the world. Each of these could scale into multibillion-dollar sectors over the next two decades while strengthening resource security and resilience. It is clear that climate action must be woven into the economic fabric, not treated as a standalone sector. This requires green industrial policies that create markets through public procurement, financial innovations to channel capital where it's needed most and a skills revolution to train millions for the jobs of tomorrow.

Fourth, establish a science-policy interface with credible data. Establishing a stronger science–policy interface is essential in this new era of climate diplomacy. Policymaking must move beyond broad targets toward granular, evidence-based decision-making that informs finance allocation, planning and transition pathways. CEEW’s Climate Resilience Analytics and Visualisation Intelligence System (CRAVIS.ai) is a first-of-its-kind AI-powered climate intelligence platform from the Global South. It combines over 40 years of historical climate data (279 indicators for more than 730 districts in India) and allows users to overlay climate data with sectoral datasets — such as India’s power infrastructure, agriculture, land use, and public health information — for integrated risk analysis. The platform is designed as a collaborative data commons and demonstrates how subnational climate-risk intelligence can support more targeted investments and improve institutional preparedness. Such robust tools and science–policy interface are critical to help countries translate complex data into insights for actionable policy, strengthen trust across regions and enable more coordinated, transparent, and implementation-oriented climate cooperation.

Finally, the power of regional cooperation is rising. Asia, for instance, is no longer a passive recipient of global climate decisions but a locomotive in its own right, uniquely positioned to shape the transition with strategic coherence and implementation-driven partnerships. Within the broader landscape, smaller regions such as South Asia and Southeast Asia can become crucial intermediaries, amplifying the concerns of smaller and more vulnerable states that lack bargaining power. Shared risks—from climate impacts, economic instability, energy and data demand intersects, or energy insecurity—can encourage this new form of coordination. For instance, the recently launched South Asia Hub of the Global Heat Health Information Network unifies actors across government, academia, private enterprise and civil society to share learnings as the region experiences unprecedented heat waves. With a focus on heat and health, heat at work, and adaptive cooling, the hub aims to converge mitigation and adaptation efforts, recognizing regional similarities and sensitivities but with hyperlocal effectiveness. Such initiatives represent a new architecture of cooperation: more agile, regional and solutions-oriented.

In a world where global consensus is increasingly difficult, these coalitions of capability can become engines of implementation. The risks of delay, inaction, and fragmentation are real. But the opportunities are equally real: Clean energy is now on the economic agenda, newer coalitions are emerging outside multilateral structures and climate impacts are forcing their way to the top of the geopolitical agenda, whether leaders like it or not. The question is not whether the transition to a low-carbon, climate-resilient future will happen, but whether finance, action and political will move fast and strategically enough to ensure it happens before the window of action closes.