Navine
Murshid examines the social roots of another unnatural "natural
disaster" as historic rainfall has submerge large areas in South Asia.
September
6, 2017
WHILE
HURRICANE Harvey wreaked havoc in Texas, another climate tragedy was unfolding
halfway around the world.
The
worst monsoons in decades have left 1,400 dead across the region and millions
without shelter, food and potable drinking water. Flooding and landslides have
directly affected at least 41 million people in Bangladesh, India and Nepal. In
some of the poorest and hardest-hit areas, disease is beginning to spread. The
rains submerged roughly one-third of the entire land mass of Bangladesh.
After
Katrina, Sandy, and Harvey, perhaps Americans can now better identify with the
insecurity that floods--and other "natural" disasters--bring to the
people of South Asia year in, year out.
During
August, there
were simultaneous floods across the globe--in the U.S., Niger, Yemen,
Sierra Leone, Nepal, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Ferocious
rains of historic proportions aren't the only similarity that the flood zones
shared. In Houston; Niamey, Niger; Dhaka, Bangladesh; and Mumbai, India, urban
development--in particular, pouring concrete over wetlands--literally paved the
way for deadly flooding by covering over the geography that has historically
served as natural sponges that absorb the annual monsoons.
Mumbai,
for example, is a city created by linking seven islands created through a
process of "land reclamations," a term that speaks to the entitlement
that capitalist developers feel with respect to the earth.
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
WHAT
MAINSTREAM media coverage there is of these floods tends to lump together the
cases of Bangladesh, Nepal, India and Pakistan into a single "South
Asian" experience, perpetuating the notion that "India equals South
Asia."
By
treating the floods in these countries as the result of similar processes,
these reports excuse the role India plays as a regional hegemon in both causing
and exacerbating the effects of such disasters in smaller, neighboring
countries.
Consider
the fact that the most severely affected areas in Bangladesh were not cities
with a concrete urban infrastructure, but rural areas in the north of the
country. In other words, urban sprawl alone does not explain Bangladesh's
floods.
Breaking
down the figures, of the 1,400 reported killed in South Asia, around 150 died
in Bangladesh, even though it suffered the worst flooding in the last 100
years, with one-third of Bangladesh under water. Note also that Bangladesh has
higher population density relative to India--1,251 per square kilometer versus
445.
Due
to its history of flooding (there were 200
"natural disasters" between 1980 and 2016), the many river deltas
that mark its geography, and its position as the "ground
zero of climate change," the Bangladeshi government has enacted
reforms in the last two decades to better respond to disasters and manage
relief efforts--including early warning systems, the creation of shelters at
the neighborhood level utilizing schools and mosques, and deploying the
military for relief efforts.
While
these seem like the most basic measures, the government response to the floods
in India and the U.S. shows that even these simple measures were not in place.
In
fact, the severity of the floods in Houston were downplayed
by city officials to prevent mass exodus and blocked highways. Similarly,
there are claims that Indian
government officials were slow to issue warnings about flash floods and
deploy the military to help carry out relief efforts.
It
is an indictment of a much wealthier country in the U.S. that Bangladesh has
deployed its resources to mitigate the immediate impact of natural disasters.
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
UNFORTUNATELY,
THAT is where the positive news ends. While Bangladesh has learned how to
prevent mass deaths from floods and cyclones, the destruction to homes,
livelihood and food supplies from the current disaster may well be
unparalleled. Bangladesh must now brace for another humanitarian crisis, with acute
shortages of food and drinking water.
Bangladesh
also lacks $6 billion--the
amount that Trump has earmarked for reconstruction of the Texas coast--to
rebuild in the wake of the massive destruction the floods caused.
For
all the institutional reforms that Bangladesh has implemented, there exist
structural constraints to further progress, and unless these are resolved,
"natural" disasters will remain an annual affair in Bangladesh.
The
chief barrier to better flood preparation is Bangladesh's subordination to
India as the latter pursues its regional imperial interests. That's a boat that
Bangladesh is hesitant to rock, even as the idea that its Prime Minister Sheikh
Hasina is "selling Bangladesh to India" finds popularity.
The
ruling Awami League has been a pro-India political party since India supported
Bangladesh's War of Independence in 1971 against domination by Pakistan. In
part, this is strategic--Bangladesh cannot afford bad relations with a powerful
neighbor that surrounds it to the north, east and west and with
which it shares 54 rivers. Bangladesh is also downstream, which means it is
dependent on India for water.
India
shares its water voluntarily, but there's nothing compelling it to do so. A
1996 treaty sets out guidelines for sharing the water of the Ganges River,
but in the years since India has removed clauses from it
that guarantee fairness. At present, River Teesta is
at the heart of contention, but Indian politicians have tried to avoid
discussions of the issue.
India's
water policies contributed to both floods and droughts in Bangladesh.
Bangladeshi activists and government officials have long claimed that India
uses water as a weapon, releasing
water during monsoons and shutting it down during droughts. This time
around, India's opening of the Teesta Barrage worsened the floods and caused
landslides and land erosion in northern Bangladesh, contributing to
one-third of the country being under water.
That
the Modi government has also recently revived a river-linking project to divert
the Ganges and Brahmaputra--two of the four major rivers that provide most of
Bangladesh's fresh water supply--does not bode well for the future. Purportedly
to divert "surplus" water to "deficit" areas, the scheme
has come under harsh criticism from environmentalists for the damage it is
projected to cause the environment.
An
India-Bangladesh joint plan to set up the Rampal
Power Station in the Sundarbans, the world's largest mangrove forest, is
yet another way that India exerts coercion.
Despite
public opposition from activists, civil society organizations, international
organizations and scientists who point to a host of environmental
concerns--including the ability of the marshes to regulate water that provide
natural protection again flooding--the government is set to move ahead with the
planned project.
It
is perhaps not surprising that the Indian
energy giant Reliance Power has been given the contract to develop the
power plant.
This
is hardly a "benevolent" effort to provide
power to an electricity-starved country, as it is often portrayed, but
rather a way that India's energy sector can continue with business as usual at
a time when people in India have begun protests
against dirty power plants. Instead of investing in clean energy sources,
India chooses to exploit its weaker neighbors in the name of benevolence.
India,
too, is a victim of climate change and has to rely on the good graces of China,
which is further upstream, for its own water supply. But India's own
predicament has not led to a more cooperative spirit in water diplomacy.
The
focus on short-term growth and profiteering not only prevents local-level
cooperation to mitigate the effects of erratic weather patterns, but it also
delegitimizes efforts by South Asian countries to hold accountable a system
where just a
hundred companies are responsible for 70 percent of the world's carbon
emissions.
When
governments in South Asia downplay the risks of climate change, they put the
lives of millions at peril.
No comments:
Post a Comment