Climate change tests human empathy

If God had wanted to design an enemy for mankind, he would have chosen climate change, not Satan. In the fight against climate change, the human species is up against all its most fundamental and inherent frailties -- greed, selfishness, envy, tribalism, narcissism.

Take, for instance, the fact that countries that have the most resources are also the ones with the least to lose. Increased wildfires across the developed world have been wreaking havoc every summer. This year, New York looked like a city straight out of the apocalypse, shrouded in brown haze. Yet, richer countries are still far better placed than either small islands or agrarian economies.

Island-States are striving to save themselves from drowning, quite literally: In 2022, global sea levels were on average four inches above 1993 levels. Meanwhile, erratic climate patterns have triggered a wave of crop loss and farmer suicides across the tropics.

By contrast, countries like Russia are, in fact, gaining. For most of history, Russian emperors have waged wars in the quest for warm seas and trade routes. But as the Arctic icecaps melt, Russia has begun to discover new shipping lanes and maritime resources – including, possibly, fossil fuels -- worth tens of trillions of dollars up north. Estimates predict that the Arctic will be completely free of summer sea-ice by 2035.

Russia is also waiting to unlock agriculture in its long inhospitable tundra region. Some two-thirds of Russia’s territory is covered in frost all year round. But in 2021, Russia’s environment minister declared that much of that will become arable within 20-30 years.

Then, there’s the question of money. Of the 10 highest revenue-earning companies on the Fortune 500 list, five are oil companies. Of the eight Indian companies that make that list, three are oil companies (four, if you include Reliance Industries, which owns massive oil interests).

To combat climate change, therefore, mankind needs to combat its basest impulses and showcase extraordinary altruism and empathy. That was the impossible brief for diplomats in Dubai this week at the UN climate summit — also called CoP28.

As these competing interests came to the fore, the otherwise staid world of diplomacy saw much drama and emotion. To start with, there was controversy over the fact that a petrostate was hosting the world’s preeminent climate change summit. Then, there was pushback from the oil industry against a campaign to end fossil fuels. That evoked tearsfrom the minister of one Pacific island-nation, who lamented that she can barely face her 12-year-old daughter when she returns home.

In the end, the summit ended with an historic agreement that mentioned -- for the first time in 30 years of climate change diplomacy! -- the problem of fossil fuels. But even in that triumph, there was controversy. The final declaration upset several delegates by calling for “transitioning away” from fossil fuels without a deadline, instead of “phasing out.” There were also passionate accusations that the president of the summit -- unironically, an Emirati oil executive -- had gavelled through the deal without consulting the small island-states.

Yet, as Denmark’s Minister for Climate and Energy, Dan Jorgensen, said, “We’re standing here in an oil country, surrounded by oil countries, and we made the decision saying let’s move away from oil and gas.” That was admittedly an extraordinary outcome — and perhaps a sign that more climate summits ought to be held in the tropics and deserts, under the full brunt of climate change.

In that context, while in Dubai, Prime Minister Narendra Modi called for the 2028 summit to be held in India. May I suggest Ahmedabad in the summer.