A couple of days ago, Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina wrote a piece originally published in The Guardian about her concerns regarding the devastating effects climate change is having on Bangladesh. As the Chair of the Climate Vulnerable Forum, she states, among other things, that the G-20 countries are responsible for 80% of the total emissions and that the world’s poorest countries have kept “their side of the bargain”.
Fair enough. The climate crisis in Bangladesh is true, real and palpable. There are no doubts about that. The consistent and continuous annual floodings, hurricanes, monsoons, etc. are a testament to the adverse effects of climate change for millions of Bangladeshis, particularly poverty-stricken ones.
Nothing about Sheikh Hasina’s concerns and points regarding climate change in Bangladesh is debatable.
What is curious, however, is the cherry picking of a subject which can be stretched out and blamed on the developed G-20 countries, a subject for which the Awami League, its cronies and coterie cannot single-handedly be asked to take ownership for.
If climate change, mostly caused by others is to be blamed for the destruction of Bangladesh, what of matters which cannot be blamed on the international community?
What would Sheikh Hasina’s responses be to the other hundreds of factors which are by products of the “Awami League crisis”?
Is mass corruption not destroying the country? What about the stripping of Bangladeshi’s freedom of speech and press? Do Bangladeshis not suffer when their hard earned money magically vanishes from their financial institutions? Do they not cry when their love ones are killed extrajudicially or picked up by state agencies in mass enforced disappearance schemes for speaking out about her? Do they not feel betrayed when their elections are conducted as a mockery and their democratic rights are snatched away from them?
What does Sheikh Hasina have to say to the thousands of families who have never seen justice for their daughters who were raped by those affiliated with her party? And to the wives and children of those who were picked up by the Secret Service, never to return home?
Hypothetically, had there been no such thing as climate crisis, would Bangladesh be a peaceful and prosperous nation? This is perhaps a rhetorical question.
The question is simple: Why is there a need for the Prime Minister to be so outspoken about climate change caused by exterior forces, yet completely silent on matters which originate with the Bangladesh ruling party?
*The writer is the Editor-in-Chief of Aequitas Review.
September 24, 2020
