Earlier this week, European Union lawmakers laid the groundwork for the rollout of its proposed carbon border adjustment mechanism from 2026. Essentially a carbon border tax, it is shrouded in green principles of pricing carbon, reducing emissions and preventing carbon leakage to combat global warming. But in reality it is nothing but a tax against emerging economies like India exporting to the EU.
True, the European bloc has ambitious climate targets of cutting greenhouse gases by 55% over this decade and seeks to withdraw free carbon allowances for its most polluting industries. However, by targeting imports of carbon-intensive goods such as aluminium, steel, cement, fertilisers and electricity, it is imposing European emission standards on emerging economies. This is a clear violation of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities of international climate action.
The rich countries of the global north bear historic responsibility for global warming. But after having achieved a high standard of living through centuries of polluting industries, they now want to slam the development door shut on the rest of the world. Further exemplifying this hypocrisy is the fact that when the Ukraine war pushed up energy prices last year, EU nations had no qualms falling back on dirty coal.
Plus, rich nations have done little to mobilise the targeted 100 billion dollars for climate funding to help developing nations transition to low-carbon pathways. Thus, India is right to object to the EU carbon tax. It should prepare retaliatory measures, including taking the matter to the World Trade Organization and flagging it as a non-tariff barrier.
India is right to object to the European carbon tax because
India's objection rests on growth, unmet funding and historic responsibility, so the answer is 1, 3 and 4.
The tax targets India's carbon-intensive exports, which would affect its economic growth, matching item 1.
Rich nations have not mobilised the promised 100 billion dollars in climate funding, matching item 3.
The rich countries of the global north bear historic responsibility for global warming, matching item 4.
Item 2 is wrong because the passage does not say India is unconcerned about global warming.
In fact India objects on grounds of fairness, not indifference to the climate.
So only the three valid grounds in items 1, 3 and 4 support India's objection.
Want more like this? Create a free account to practise a full test, track your progress, and get spaced-repetition review.
Practise on Mcqkart →🎓 Book an expert →