The Middle East and North Africa region is likely to be one of the hardest hit by climate change. Rising global temperatures are expected to strain the already waning water sources of several MENA nations, according to a World Bank report. This will place extreme stress on food production, public health, and access to resources for millions of people. Given that many MENA nations are already attempting to cope with social injustice, civil war, poverty, and terrorist violence, the added burdens of climate change could send the region into a crisis. Experts expect to see a particularly sharp rise in violent conflicts as resources become increasingly scarce. This is already the case in nations like Mali, where terrorist groups have exploited climate-related tensions to increase recruitment and violent extremism. There is no question that action must be taken swiftly to avert the most catastrophic effects of climate change in MENA.
On the whole, the responses of MENA governments to climate change have been inconsistent at best. Since many of the region’s economies depend on fossil fuels, their reluctance to mount a large-scale response to climate change is unsurprising. Some nations like Saudi Arabia have launched flashy but ineffective climate campaigns to gain international favor while protecting their oil. Other nations have done little to nothing to address the climate crisis. Still, there are a few beacons of hope in nations like Morocco, which are leading the charge towards a greener future for MENA. This article will examine a few of the region’s approaches to climate policy—and the inconsistencies between them that point to a need for broad, systematic intervention by the international community.
Saudi Arabia
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the most oil-rich nations in the world. According to Forbes, it ranks as the largest exporter of petroleum, which accounts for 87% of its budget revenues, 42% of its GDP, and 90% of its export earnings. Saudi Arabia also plays a leading role in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Given the nation’s reliance on oil, the international community was surprised when Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman recently unveiled plans to attain net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2060. “The Kingdom, the region, and the world need to go much further and faster in combating climate change. We reject the false choice between preserving the economy and protecting the environment,” he proclaimed. The announcement made a big splash on the global stage ahead of COP26, the 26th annual UN climate summit, as Saudi Arabia was attempting to assert itself as a climate leader in the Middle East. However, a closer look at their climate policy plans reveals a stronger resemblance to greenwashing than to true environmental progress.
The Crown Prince asserted that Saudi Arabia would be using the “circular carbon economy" approach to reach its goals. This framework for managing emissions involves capturing carbon dioxide and (a) reusing it in other energy-intensive processes; (b) recycling it into other materials; or (c) storing it underground. As part of this plan, the Kingdom has also pledged to plant ten billion trees, increase the size of its protected natural areas, and generate 50% of its energy from renewable sources by 2030. While this sounds promising at first glance, the circular carbon economy approach has come under significant scrutiny. Activists argue that reliance on carbon capture encourages corporations and governments to delay meaningful action like transitioning to renewable energy (note the absence of reduced oil production from Saudi Arabia’s climate plans). Similarly, scientists assert that carbon capture technology has strict limits, both economically and geologically. Overall, Saudi Arabia’s commitments have been labeled as “highly insufficient” on the Climate Action Tracker. Despite its eco-friendly rhetoric, it is clear that Saudi Arabia will not commit to comprehensive climate action in the near future due to its reliance on fossil fuels.
Iran
More ineffective than Saudi Arabia’s climate policy is Iran’s. Climate Action Tracker rates its plans as “critically insufficient,” the lowest rating a country can receive. Iran has signed but not yet ratified or approved the Paris Agreement, which means it is not subject to its mandates. This means that while the nation has established some internal programs for addressing climate change, there are few mechanisms by which the international community can hold it accountable. This is problematic as Iran is also one of the world’s major oil producers, although it is only responsible for 2.48% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Contrary to Saudi Arabia, a comparatively wealthy nation, there are questions as to whether Iran and nations like it are capable of addressing climate change on their own. Iran has been subjected to heavy sanctions by the international community over its nuclear program in recent years. It has also faced immense population growth, extreme poverty, and rising crime and violence for the last several decades. As Iranian environmental journalist Sanam Mahoozi writes, “While the Iranian government officially recognizes climate change as an existential threat, fighting it does not seem to be high up on its to-do list.” The nation simply does not have the bandwidth or funds to tackle climate change alongside the other humanitarian crises it must face.
Morocco
Contrary to the previous two nations, Morocco has emerged as a quiet and effective climate leader in MENA. The nation has maximized the potential of its desert locale and become a world leader in solar power generation—renewable sources now meet almost two-fifths of their electricity needs. Morocco first set its eyes on renewable energy in the late 2010s when it pledged that 42% of the nation’s power would be generated using renewables by 2020. The nation missed this target by a small percentage (having only 37% capacity by 2020) but saw a massive expansion of its renewable energy sector. This included the construction of the Noor Ouarzazate Solar Complex, the largest concentrated solar power plant in the world. Morocco has planned to continue the growth of its renewable energy capacity to 52% by 2030.
Climate Action Tracker rates Morocco’s climate strategy as “almost sufficient,” which indicates that its policies are nearly on track with the 1.5°C warming target laid out in the Paris Agreement (and could be completely on track with only moderate improvements). While Morocco certainly still has progress to make, its efforts are currently some of the best of all the MENA nations.
Common But Differentiated Responsibilities
While most agree that fighting climate change must be a global effort, there is still significant debate about exactly how much responsibility each nation should bear. For instance, Iran and Saudi Arabia emit roughly ten times more carbon dioxide than Morocco annually, yet Morocco has the most ambitious climate strategy of the three nations. This trend can be seen throughout the world, as many of the largest emitters have become “free riders,” receiving the benefits of carbon emissions without paying their share of the costs. This begs the question as to how the responsibility of fighting climate change should be apportioned. Should it be by a nation’s share of current global emissions? Historical emissions? Or should the most developed nations take on more responsibility? Some have even posed that entities like corporations should be called upon. For instance, Saudi Arabia’s state-run oil company Aramco has never been subject to meaningful regulation and is the largest source of corporate emissions in the world. Their sizable contributions to global emissions may give the argument for corporations’ participation some merit.
The United Nations attempted to settle this debate by laying out the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” (CBDR) at the 1992 Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit. CBDR acknowledges that all countries share a common imperative to fight climate change. More importantly, however, it distinguishes between developed and developing nations, charging developed nations with more of the financial responsibility of climate change. This means that nations like the US, UK, Canada, and Japan should shoulder more of the climate burden in underdeveloped regions like MENA since many of its nations are unable to address the problem themselves.
Looking Forward
One of the largest hurdles for the Middle East will be the world’s transition away from fossil fuels. While some nations might have the capability for a rapid switch to green energy, such a move would be catastrophic for the oil-dependent MENA economy. Furthermore, the region’s extreme vulnerabilities to climate change make its situation even more precarious. World leaders must develop an innovative approach to climate policy and aid to address the complexities of MENA’s case. For instance, Ranj Alaaldin, a non-resident fellow at the Brookings Institution, advocates for an investment in knowledge and culture by the international community. “An investment in research and awareness could trigger a cultural shift within government and society that allows for a re-calibration of public sector reform approaches and that adjusts good governance strategies to encourage and enable innovations that alleviate climate-related challenges.”
The climate crisis poses unprecedented challenges to the MENA region, and the current support regimen has not resulted in consistent action or tangible results. The interconnectedness of our rapidly globalizing world means that nearly every nation will suffer if the MENA is devastated by climate change. Not only will the global economy face serious threats, but the world will also face the loss of a region rich in history and culture.