Jk in India last December vs HRC now

Here is the NYT article on HRC's trip to India. This is really bad for climate change. The article has none of the language Kerry has used since before Bali - on how developing nations can't be held to targets holding firm then reducing carbon emmisions like the developing countries, but they have to avoid our mistakes. Also, as impressed as he is about green building, I serious doubt Kerry would think of equating the Taj Mahal to one.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/world/asia/20diplo.html

(the comments are not positive to HRC, but of greater concern is the damage her ineptitude is doing to the already daunting challenge to get a workable solution here. (Contrast to Kerry meeting with the Chinese.)

Here was Kerry in 2008:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Kerry_in_India_with_Obamas_Mumbai_message/articleshow/3836241.cms

Even after the attacks, he was positively received there - and in Pakistan.

I have to wonder if perhaps another reason might be they perceive Clinton as weak and feel emboldened to speak out against some US pressure over climate change.
And, what a stupid comparison- comparing to a new "green" office building to the Taj Mahal. She is so smooth-lol.

India and China have been problematic in climate change talks for decades now. This is part of what caused the Kyoto Treaty to fail overwhelmingly in the US Senate. There has been progress in getting China and India to agree to reductions, but this has been extremely difficult to do and has been for decades.

I don't see Sen. Clinton as having any harder a time than anyone else. The Chinese and the Indians feel resentment at being told by an industrialized nation that they can't do what we did to become rich and powerful. That is the same stumbling block that Sen.Kerry faced in the past.

The Indian representatives were blunt with Sec. Clinton. They have been blunt with Sen. Kerry in the past as well. At least no one stood up and booed her, as the US delegation was actively booed in Bali in 2007.

being so outspoken in public over this matter. I can understand how they feel and they do have some good points, but to air these differences so bluntly in public seems unusual to me. Maybe, they felt so comfortable with Clinton they thought they could air these differences for more people to hear.

Copenhagen is only a few months away and people want to get their signed commitments done. India and China need to commit and they are having problems with that. The disagreements will get more vocal and December approaches.