A few months ago, when I visited Dhaka, a close friend of mine, with whom I shared my enthusiasm about climate change, asked me: “Do you have many examples from the past where developed countries had been very worried for the developing countries?” I was confused.
I couldn’t say much. “Why are you asking this?” I asked in turn. “Well, you know, it’s all about politics ... environmental politics,” she replied.
Well, although you may observe politics in everyday matters, there are often realities that underpin political interests -- facts which cannot be ignored, such as climate change.
“Huh, so I want to know exactly when will your TV mega serial come to an end? I mean, the last episode.” He went on to say: “Do you know how long a TV series lasts? Your climate talk or negotiation drama has lasted even longer than our most popular current soap opera.”
It didn’t take me long to understand his frustration. However, within days, I realised that my friend wasn’t alone. There are many in Dhaka city who barely believe in the human contributions associated with climate change.
I have met some who are concerned about the increasing heat in the capital, however, they also think this climate talk each year might not bring any good for the country. And yes, I don’t see anything wrong with this attitude.
With close to 160 million people, this very cramped country is more concerned about today’s survival -- for them, the future is far away. On the other hand, Bangladesh will be the hardest hit from climate change. I can’t remember how many times I had heard this from the international experts in recent years.
Being in the middle of these two groups, if I may be honest, I can remember those disastrous moments -- people’s tears, the deaths and riots over survival following the impacts of natural disasters in Bangladesh.
So, what are we waiting for? Action or scepticism? Scepticism is good, it often pushes an activist’s work in the right direction. However, what good are we doing for the country by sitting idle?
Let me be clear, I was once a sceptic too. I wish I could go back to 2010, when I used to argue with Professor Martin Todd at Sussex on behalf of climate change sceptics. Gradually, as I learned all the theories and saw the realities of the increasing natural disasters that hit Japan, Haiti, Philipines, and most recently Nepal, I cannot sit idly listening to and believing in sceptics.
Yes, there have been disasters in the past as well, but were they this frequent and intense? Of course not. This is what we all are about to face and suffer, that’s why we need to take the issue seriously. Yes, Bangladesh is one of the lowest emitters of the world, that’s why we should raise our voice even more. Because, the country doesn’t deserve to be affected for other’s contributions to climate change.
As Bangladesh plans to submit its INDCs (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions) by August of this year, as part of the commitment to a new international climate agreement in the Paris summit on climate change, it should use it as an opportunity. An opportunity to explore international benefits and express the limitations of a populous country, something which cannot be done without international support.
The World Resources Institute explains it well: “INDCs are the primary means for governments to communicate internationally the steps they will take to address climate change in their own countries. INDCs will reflect each country’s ambition for reducing emissions, taking into account its domestic circumstances and capabilities.”
So, what is the Bangladesh government’s take on this? Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has indicated that the country will take action without affecting its prospects for growth. However, if there were incentives for Bangladesh, we would probably hear more “for climate’s sake” instead of the “economy’s sake.”
And if the Paris summit fails, and the INDCs don’t come to an agreement, frustrations over negotiations will be prolonged. Certainly, the world is waiting to see the last episode.