Gulf countries need revolutionary climate action, not glossy mega-projects
In May 2016 researchers from Germany's Max Planck Institute for Chemistry and the Cyprus Institute published a deeply concerning study for the Middle East.
According to the academics, climate change could make large parts of the region uninhabitable. By the year 2100, midday temperatures on warm days could reach 50°C, with heat waves potentially occurring ten times more than today.
The expected temperature rises could put "the very existence of its inhabitants in jeopardy", noted Jos Lelieveld, the Director of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry.
The future looks similarly bleak on the global level. In 2013 Mark Maslin, Professor of Climatology at University College London, explained that "We are already planning for a 4°C world because that is where we are heading. I do not know of any scientists who do not believe that."
What would a 4°C world look like, I asked Professor Kevin Anderson, the Deputy Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, earlier this year? "Global chaos and collapse I think would be a fair assessment", was his frightening reply.
He went on to list a number of likely outcomes: Sea level rise of one metre by 2100; an increase in the frequency and severity of storms; a 40 percent reduction in staple crop yields; substantial changes in rainfall patterns and massive migration.
In the face of this crisis, Middle East governments have slowly started to turn their attention to the problem of climate change, largely presenting it as an uncontroversial topic that requires technical solutions – a perfect example of fatally flawed "techno-optimism" if ever there was one.
|Though it's rarely said, these top-down mega-projects are unlikely to help in addressing climate change|
A number of large-scale, press-friendly projects are being built, including Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy and Masdar City near Abu Dhabi.
"Designed to be zero-carbon and zero-waste, home to a population of 40,000 people, 50,000 commuters, in an area of six square kilometres" Masdar City is "playing a crucial role in the development of sustainable design and technology", gushed Susan Lee from the University of Birmingham.
However, though it's rarely said, these top-down mega projects are unlikely to help in addressing climate change. Take Masdar: in reality, as Grist noted earlier this year, it "is, essentially, the world's most sustainable ghost town", with only a small part of the planned city built and the completion date pushed back from 2016 to 2030.
According to Deutsche Welle, critics "see Masdar first and foremost as a clever project to improve Abu Dhabi's image" when "it remains one of the world's worst polluters".
|'If all people on the planet had the footprint of the average resident of Qatar, we would need 4.8 planets,' - World Wildlife Fund 2014 report|
And it's not just the United Arab Emirates. The World Wildlife Fund's 2014 Living Planet report found Kuwait and Qatar have the world's highest per capita ecological footprint. "If all people on the planet had the footprint of the average resident of Qatar, we would need 4.8 planets", the report noted.
"The thing about a crisis this big, this all-encompassing, is that it changes everything", Canadian author Naomi Klein argues in her seminal 2014 book on climate change. "It changes what we can do, what we can hope for, what we can demand from ourselves and our leaders. It means there is a whole lot of stuff that we have been told is inevitable that simply cannot stand."
Klein maintains the scale of the problem means radical transformations are required in the political, economic and cultural spheres. In the Middle East this will mean revolutionary change.
|Read More: Can Arab oil giants move beyond petroleum?|
For example, the Paris climate agreement pledged to hold "the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels".
What does this mean for oil producing states? Using industry data, a recent report from US-based thinktank Oil Change International explained that "the potential carbon emissions from the oil, gas, and coal in the world's currently operating fields and mines would take us beyond 2°C of warming".
Averting runaway climate change, according to the study, means no new fossil fuel extraction and some existing fields and mines closing before being fully exploited.
|We need to successfully challenge established power - that is the extractive-enriched, growth-obsessed, profit-driven, largely unelected elites|
Furthermore, Klein argues it is dangerous to consider environmental problems on their own. Rather they will only be solved together with other problems such as economic inequality, the corporate domination of the political and social world, consumerism and western imperialism.
Many of the necessary changes will be difficult for rulers in the Middle East to contemplate.
Analysing the Economic Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index and the World Energy Council's Energy Trilemma Index, Professor Robert Looney from the Naval Postgraduate School in California explains that democratic governments are "more likely to comply with global agreements that set specific targets for carbon agreements" and "give environmental sustainability priority over either energy security or affordable energy supplies".
Concerned about their own survival, authoritarian regimes will invariably prioritise energy security and equity, Looney argues, since rising fuel prices risk social unrest.
A media free of government censorship and corporate influence is a key component of Looney's findings, as it creates an informed citizenry. And once large numbers of people understand the dire threat of climate change, they will likely push for government action.
An independent and critical media also engenders discussion and disagreement. The alternative - sadly common in the Middle East - is hugely counterproductive and threatening to young people and future generations as it muzzles criticism and serious debate.
|Progressive and lasting change almost always comes from below|
For example, one critic of Masdar (who described it as a "green Disneyland") said they wished to remain anonymous "Otherwise, you could get in trouble in Abu Dhabi".
Another key feature of more democratic societies, is an active and independent civil society. As freed slave Frederick Douglass once said "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will."
Progressive and lasting change almost always comes from below - something Klein implicitly understands when she calls for a "grassroots anti-extraction uprising".
The blocking of the Dakota Access pipeline in the United States, the cancellation of Margaret Thatcher's road expansion plans in Britain ("the biggest road-building programme since the Romans"), the introduction of the United Kingdom's groundbreaking 2008 Climate Change Act - all of these environmental victories happened because of long campaigns by activist groups overcoming state-corporate power.
In short, far from being an uncontroversial, technical issue, climate change is actually a real threat to the status quo - in the Middle East and elsewhere. Because if we are serious about addressing climate change, then we need to successfully challenge established power - that is the extractive-enriched, growth-obsessed, profit-driven, largely unelected elites whose actions have led us to this existential crisis point.
With some of the region's governments repeatedly trying to impede international agreements to combat climate change, this is especially true for the Middle East. With time running out, the future of the Middle East and the wellbeing of humanity depends on how quickly we win the revolutionary changes that are so desperately needed.
Ian Sinclair is a freelance writer based in London and the author of The March that Shook Blair: An Oral History of 15 February 2003. He tweets @IanJSinclair
Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.