Politicization of environment is a unique feature of international politics in the twenty-first century. In the game of environmental politics, rising powers, like India, are playing a very decisive role as they are indispensable factors in achieving a solution of climate crisis. Since the beginning of global environmental politics (GEP), India has been a game changer, sometimes regarded as a deal breaker. India's environmental negotiation strategies are based on equity, which often successfully derail the global environmental negotiations. From 2006 onwards, at the domestic level, a series of environmental policies were adopted by the Indian government that reflected optimism about resolving the crisis of environment. The policies were mainly focused on energy efficiency. Also, contrary to its long-standing position, in 2009, India voluntarily committed to reduce its carbon emission, which was revised in the form of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) in Paris Agreement in 2015. However, the changes in Indian environmental policies, both at the domestic and international levels, are not sudden, but they are deeply linked with the concerns of India's energy security. India's declaration of sunshine alliance at the Paris climate conference is nothing but a giant leap towards transforming India from an energy-dependent country to energy-independent country.

There is an ongoing debate whether China is a satisfied power or a dissatisfied revisionist power. On the basis of the concept of regime insecurity and power transition theory, this article argues that the resolution of this debate mainly depends on some essentially interrelated complex factors—China’s assertive behaviour, China’s core interests, China’s internal security, and China’s involvement in territorial disputes. Moreover, this article examines the validity of the usual claim of power transition theory that the dominant power is always satisfied with the status quo, and contrary to this idea of power transition theory, this article suggests that the dominant power can be dissatisfied and revisionist too if its hegemony is under threat.