:muttering:

Apologizing to the Indians for CO2 emissions.... Why are we even considering Cap & Trade when the Chinese and Indians rejected CO2 limits?

MUMBAI, India — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton opened a three-day visit to India on Saturday by urging India not to repeat American mistakes in contributing to global pollution, and she passionately defended U.S. demands for help in fighting terrorism.

"We acknowledge now with President Obama that we have made mistakes in the United States, and we along with other developed countries have contributed most significantly to the problem that we face with climate change," she said. "We are hoping a great country like India will not make the same mistakes."

She was referring to Obama's statement in Italy earlier this month that the U.S. had "sometimes fallen short" of its responsibilities in controlling its carbon emissions.

Speaking at a news conference on the pool side patio of the Taj Mahal Palace & Hotel, which was strewn with bodies after terrorists attacked this coastal city last November, she cast India and the United States as allies in the fight against terrorism.

"Yesterday's bombings in Jakarta, Indonesia, provide a painful reminder that the threat of such violent extremism is still very real. It is global. It is ruthless. It is nihilistic and it must be stopped," she said.

"We have a great sense of solidarity and sympathy, having gone through what we did on 9/11," she added.

Her voice rising, Clinton insisted that the U.S. demand for international action against terrorist should not be taken lightly.

"We know how important (it is). We are fighting wars to end the threat of terrorism against us, our friends and allies around the world." She said India can choose its own way of contributing but must be part of a broader effort to defeat the threat.

"We expect everyone" who shares the U.S. goal of a more stable world "to take strong action to prevent terrorism from taking root on their soil and making sure that terrorists are not trained and deployed" from their territory to carry out attacks elsewhere, she added.

Earlier, Clinton attended a ceremony commemorating the Mumbai attack, which killed 166 and raised tensions between nuclear rivals India and Pakistan. At the event were five staffers from the Oberoi Hotel and 10 from the Taj, including general manager Karambir Kang, who lost his wife and two children during the three-day siege.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/arti...wD99GR47G1

Great country? India's a shithole.

Has Obama's apology to anyone gotten us anything. No, so why do it? Stupidity of this administration reins supreme.

Didn't work.

India Rebuffs New Efforts for Binding Carbon Targets

By MARK LANDLER
Published: July 19, 2009

NEW DELHI — India served notice on Sunday that it remains opposed to legally binding targets to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, digging in its heels against the United States as the Obama administration begins marshaling support for a new global agreement on climate change.

India voiced its rejection of the American position in an awkwardly public forum: during a visit by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to an energy-efficient office building on the outskirts of New Delhi that was supposed to celebrate cooperation between India and the United States on climate policy.

In a closed-door meeting with Mrs. Clinton after she marveled at the building’s high-tech features, India’s environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, said, “There is simply no case for the pressure that we, who have among the lowest emissions per capita, face to actually reduce emissions.”

“If this pressure is not enough,” he continued, “we also face the threat of carbon tariffs on our exports to countries such as yours.”

Mr. Ramesh handed out his statement to reporters and reiterated his views at a news conference, with Mrs. Clinton and her special envoy for climate change, Todd Stern, standing stiffly behind him.

India’s refusal to accept mandatory cuts in emissions is neither new nor unique: China also opposes a deal with compulsory targets. Both countries say their economic growth should not be constrained when the West never faced such restrictions during its period of industrialization.

But India’s tough tactics underscore the challenge for President Obama as he seeks to hammer out a global deal before a critical United Nations climate conference in Copenhagen in December. American officials said they did not expect their differences to be aired during what was supposed to be an upbeat event, though they insisted they did not feel betrayed.

Mrs. Clinton, making the first visit to India by a top administration official, was at pains to reassure her hosts that the United States had no intention to force them into an economically crippling deal.

“No one wants to, in any way, stall or undermine economic growth that is necessary to lift millions more people out of poverty,” Mrs. Clinton said at the news conference. “The United States does not, and will not, do anything that would limit India’s economic progress.”

New Delhi’s stance may reflect its pique at a climate bill recently passed by the House of Representatives, which would impose trade sanctions on countries that did not accept binding emissions cuts.

It may also reflect domestic political pressure because India recently acceded to a statement by the Group of Eight industrial countries, which endorsed far-reaching reductions in global emissions and pledged to cap the rise in temperatures because of global warming to 2 degrees Celsius.

Indian newspapers questioned whether their government was setting the stage for further concessions on emissions. Even Mr. Stern’s presence here has raised eyebrows: On Saturday, the Times of India published an article with the headline, “Climate man’s visit shocks India.” American officials insist Mrs. Clinton had long planned to bring Mr. Stern with her.

Mr. Stern, a soft-spoken Washington lawyer, portrayed climate change as an economic boon for India, giving it the chance to invest in windmills and solar panels. “India, with its knowledge base and entrepreneurial talent and élan, is well positioned to be a winner,” he said.

Mr. Ramesh leavened his tough words with a promise of cooperation between India and the United States in “green technology.” He proposed teaming up in solar energy and biomass, and setting up joint Indian-American institutions to study the long-term effects of greenhouse-gas emissions.

Despite India’s opposition to binding reductions, he said the Indian government was committed to reaching an agreement in Copenhagen. “It is possible for us to narrow our positions,” he said.

Mrs. Clinton also sought to put a good face on the differences. “We have many more areas of agreement than has perhaps been appreciated,” she said, “and what we’re looking for is a way to have a framework that includes everyone and which demands certain steps.”

She still seemed fascinated by her tour of the office building, known as the ITC Green Center, which has been certified by an American green building council with its highest classification. The squat structure, built around a circular atrium, has windows that allow in a large amount of natural light while blocking heat. The building also recycles its water.

Its owner, ITC Limited, is a conglomerate that operates hotels and owns India’s second-largest cigarette maker — a line of business that Indian officials say has made it eager to be regarded as a good corporate citizen. Mrs. Clinton likened the building to great Indian monuments like the Taj Mahal, though she conceded “no one will confuse it with the Taj Mahal.”

(07-18-2009 10:58 PM)Rebel Wrote:  Great country? India's a shithole.

At least it's safe to be a liberal economist in India. And, by liberal, I mean "free market".

(07-19-2009 12:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  New Delhi’s stance may reflect its pique at a climate bill recently passed by the House of Representatives, which would impose trade sanctions on countries that did not accept binding emissions cuts.

We are led by idiots. How would something like this have gone over if another country had passed this a few years ago? Six months and we're off the reservation on trade wars...