Dr. Arvind Kumar*
“Be the change you wish to see in the world.” As the world observed Gandhi Jayanti, this eternal thought echoes more strongly than ever, for the crises facing humanity today are not only environmental, but also moral and civilizational. When Gandhi spoke of simplicity, trusteeship, and sarvodaya, he was not imagining a utopia but laying down a political philosophy of responsibility toward the Earth and its people. The Indian Constitution too carries forward these ideals, embedding justice, equality, fraternity, and environmental responsibility as guiding principles. Yet, as we look at the recent outcomes of the 60th Session of the UN Human Rights Council and the 80th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, one is compelled to ask: have we strayed from these ideals, and if so, how do we find our way back?
During the opening of general debate at UNGA 80 UN Secretary General, Antonio Guettress too reinforced the same saying “No matter the challenge. No matter the obstacle. No matter the hour. We must and we will overcome. Because in a world of many choices, there is one choice we must never make: The choice to give up. We must never give up.”
The Mirage of Progress
The UNHRC’s 60th Session made remarkable progress in articulating the linkages between human rights, water, and energy. The landmark “Water and Energy Nexus” report presented by Special Rapporteur Pedro Arrojo Agudo exposed how energy systems, when driven by profit and industrial demand, deplete and contaminate water. The report insisted on a dual just transition in both sectors, promoting decentralized, modular systems managed by communities themselves an idea that resonates deeply with Gandhi’s notion of Swaraj and village self-reliance.
A historic resolution on sea-level rise recognized the existential threat climate change poses to small island states, yet reaffirmed their sovereignty; acknowledging the rights of future generations, something Gandhi often emphasized when he spoke of trusteeship“ that resources belong not to us but to those who come after us.” Other reports, such as those on toxic substances, reinforced the right to a clean and healthy environment as a basic human right. The Secretary-General’s synthesis on just transitions added another moral layer: fossil fuel dependency is not only unsustainable, it is inequitable, widening the gaps between those who can adapt and those left vulnerable.
If HRC-60 affirmed human rights as the moral compass of environmental action, UNGA-80 became a sobering mirror of ambition and its limits. Nearly 100 countries, representing two-thirds of global emissions, pledged new climate targets. China, for the first time, announced economy-wide reduction commitments across all greenhouse gases, positioning itself at the global stage as a leader in climate and sustainable energy, investing heavily in renewables and pledging ambitious targets. India too has demonstrated leadership through initiatives like the International Solar Alliance and its strong commitment to renewable targets.
Yet numbers cut through the rhetoric; current plans reduce emissions by only 2.6% by 2030 compared to 2019, when science demands a 43% cut to stay within 1.5°C. Gandhi’s timeless warning that “the Earth has enough for man’s need, but not for man’s greed” echoes loudly, for today greed is disguised as complacency, where incremental progress is celebrated as if it were transformation.
The Assembly also laid bare the stark reality of the Sustainable Development Goals. Only 35 percent of the 137 targets are on track, nearly half show insufficient progress, and 18 percent have regressed since 2015. Developing countries face a staggering $4 trillion annual financing gap, even as the world requires $5–7 trillion to achieve the SDGs. Meanwhile, hunger continues to scar humanity: 750 million people go hungry and 2.3 billion face food insecurity. With this gulf between intent and impact Gandhi might have asked: how do we erect temples of progress while hunger gnaws at the very foundations of human dignity?
Living in Denial?
Perhaps the most jarring note at UNGA-80 came from unilateral rhetoric rather than collective resolve. U.S. President Donald Trump dismissed climate change as a “con job” and mocked global climate action, even threatening tariffs on nations pursuing green transitions. Such tariffs would punish developing economies those least responsible for emissions yet most vulnerable to climate shocks. In India, recent cloudbursts and floods in Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand remind us of these risks.
These contradictions deepen the fracture between North and South. Finance remains inadequate, biodiversity loss accelerates, and debt burdens grow. Inequality widens the top 10% own 76% of wealth, while the bottom half owns less than 2%. Can sustainability survive in such imbalance? Gandhi’s sarvodaya- the welfare of all rejected exclusion. Our Prime Minister’s call of sabkasaath, sabkavikas carries the same resonance. The challenge is to lift it beyond borders, and make it a global ethic.
In India, campaigns like Swachhata Hi Seva and observances like River Day remind us that sustainability is not just global but local, rooted in sustainability, community participation and welfare. Yet these efforts, however sincere, cannot stand alone if international cooperation falters. If the world is a family, as the principle of vasudhaiva kutumbakam teaches us, then how can some members of this family gorge while others starve? How can we celebrate sustainability when it is achieved by outsourcing environmental degradation to weaker economies?
Way forward
What then must be our priorities? First, to insist that climate justice be recognized as a binding principle of international law, not a moral plea. Second, to democratize finance and technology so that developing nations are not trapped in cycles of debt and dependency. Third, to design trade rules that enable, not penalize, sustainable transitions. Fourth, to embed human rights language explicitly in environmental treaties so that people, not markets, are at the center of the green transition. And most importantly, to internalize Gandhi’s philosophy that simplicity, self-reliance, and trusteeship are not archaic ideals but living strategies for resilience in an age of planetary crisis.
In the coming months, from the Second World Summit on Social Development in Doha to COP30 in Brazil, these platforms cannot afford to become echo chambers of promises. If leaders continue with rhetoric alone, what will remain for us to discuss? Our priorities must be clear: to redefine development in terms of equity and justice; to commit to binding timelines for phasing out fossil fuels; to establish new frameworks for loss and damage finance that go beyond pledges; to ensure technology sharing becomes a norm, not a concession; and to place the most vulnerable at the heart of decision-making.The question we must ask on this Gandhi Jayanti is: is sustainability about sustaining the lifestyles of the privileged, or about sustaining life itself on this fragile planet? As climate disasters intensify, as inequality widens, and as powerful voices dismiss responsibility, Gandhi’s words return to us with haunting relevance: “The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.” We know what must be done, but the only question is are we doing something about it?
*Editor, Focus Global Reporter
