Mamoon Afzal
BS International Relations
National Defense University Islamabad
The rain just would not stop and neither did the losses. In 2022, when floods swallowed up a lot of Pakistan it wasn’t the water that rose. It was also a memorial of how unstable the world really is. 33 million people were affected and the damages were over $30 billion. This is according to the World Bank and the Government of Pakistan. But then the verity that makes us uncomfortable Pakistan is responsible for less than one percent of the global emissions. This is where the real story thresholds. Not with climate change but with inequality.
We frequently hear that climate change is a problem that we all share, just because we partake in it doesn’t mean we’re all affected inversely. Some countries got rich from decades of growing their diligence using fossil energies. Now other countries are dealing with floods, droughts and economic problems. Without getting to enjoy the same benefits. This is not an accident. It is how the global system has worked for a time.
This is the divide the world can no longer ignore. The countries that did the least to cause the problem are now the ones on the lines of the crisis. The IPCC says that rich countries are responsible for most of the emissions in the past while poor countries only contributed a little. When disasters happen it is the poor countries that suffer more. And they take longer to recover. This reflects structural asymmetries in the global economic order.
What happened in Pakistan was more than a disaster, it was a warning. The floods in 2022 were not just bad for the environment. They also caused an economic problem that affected the whole country. Agriculture was destroyed in areas, roads and buildings were damaged and millions of people were pushed closer to poverty. The World Bank says that up to 9 million people could become poor because of this. It is not easy for a country to recover when it is already dealing with debt, inflation and not having enough money.
And Pakistan is not alone in this struggle. And that makes it even more alarming. Bangladesh is still dealing with rising sea levels and small island countries like the Maldives are in danger of losing their coastlines. These countries have to spend what money they have on just surviving. Building walls to protect themselves moves people to safer areas. Instead of investing in things that will help them grow in the long term. It is a cycle where they are always dealing with a crisis and never getting to develop.
Then comes the question that matters the most, who will help, and how it will happen? This is where effects get complicated. Rich countries have promised to give $100 billion every time to help with climate change. They’ve not always kept their pledges and a lot of the money they do give is in the form of loans, not gifts. This is according to the OECD reports.
In reality, survival itself is becoming a financial burden. Countries that are already struggling with problems are being pushed further into debt just to deal with disasters they did not cause. That does not help. It is a system that puts the burden on the people who’re already the most vulnerable.
Global financial institutions play a role in this. Organizations like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank often step in when there is a crisis. Their help is important. It usually comes with conditions. They have to reduce their spending, control their deficits and stabilize their economy. While these things are necessary sometimes they can also limit the country’s ability to invest in things that will help them deal with climate change, build infrastructure and protect their people. Countries are left trying to balance their stability with their long-term survival.
Technology has now become another line of inequality. Another gap that we cannot ignore. Clean energy and systems that can withstand climate change are essential today. Not all countries have equal access to them. Most of the investments in technology are in rich countries. For countries like Pakistan adopting these technologies is not about wanting to. It is about being able to afford them and having access to them.
The idea of “loss and damage” brings up the question. Numerous poor countries say they should be compensated for the detriment caused by climate change. While there has been some progress in exchanges, real action is still slow. Because when responsibility comes up, progress slows down. Rich countries do not want to commit to giving money. As a result the countries that suffer the most have to keep waiting.
Within countries the inequality is even deeper. It is often the people who suffer first and recover last. Farmers lose their crops, daily wagers lose their income and whole families are displaced. The UNDP says that the utmost of the people affected by climate disasters are from low- income groups. Climate change isn’t an environmental issue. It’s a force that makes the social and profitable gaps indeed wider.
So what needs to change? First the money that rich countries promise to give to help with climate change needs to be real and accessible. Not delayed, not conditional and not given as loans that will put countries into debt. Second, countries need to have the freedom to make their programs and invest in effects that will help them repel climate change without being confined by strict profitable rules. Third, technology needs to be participated openly so that poor countries aren’t left behind in the transition to sustainable systems.
Beyond policies and promises this is about something more basic, fairness. The current way of growing the economy has made some people rich and others vulnerable. This imbalance can no longer be ignored. In the end climate change is not about the weather getting hotter or more extreme. It is about who gets protected and who gets left behind. The real question is no longer whether we can stop climate change.
The real question is whether we will stop it in a way. Because if we do not then the gap between the people who caused the problem and the people who suffer from it will only get wider. That is a cost that the world cannot afford. Climate Change and the Global South are closely linked. We need to make sure that the Global South is protected from the effects of Climate Change.
