38 Shares 9



29

0







Like the 194 other countries that signed the Paris Agreement, Iran's Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) for greenhouse gas reductions must be ratified internally before they are official; and although it has received virtually no international news coverage, now that the United States has irresponsibly pulled out of the agreement, an intense debate is raging within Iran on whether or not the Paris Agreement should be internally ratified. Even as I write this piece, members of the Department of Environment have been summoned to parliament to defend their stance and explain the details of the commitments they have given in the INDC.

Iranians are shrewd and intelligent people. They are well educated, and diligently follow international affairs. So a logical question is, why in the world is Iran entertaining the idea of following the US out the door? Hence, as an academic who has found himself in the midst of all the debate, I have compiled a list of reasons why some Iranians are opposing the Paris Agreement. In effect, these are the most common problems I face when trying to defend the planet:

1. Thinking of anthropogenic climate change as just a "theory": a popular argument by those opposing the Paris Agreement is that the global greenhouse effect caused by gases such as CO2 is just a scientific theory among numerous other theories. Although the general public within Iran does recognize carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas, but some argue that compared with other influences on Earth's climate, man-made greenhouse gases are miniscule. On a nationally televised debate I had a couple of days ago, a member of the audience asked why I am so keen on defending the IPCC's conclusions and disregarding the other 20 or so explanations on why the Earth is warming. I tried to explain why as far as we know human activity is the main culprit; but I suspect it might have fallen on deaf ears. If in Europe, the anthropogenic explanation for global warming has gotten the widest coverage in the media while other possible explanations have to some extent been muffled, in Iran, the bias is in the opposite direction.

2. Distrust towards the west: Iranians, rightfully, are somewhat pessimistic towards international agreements, especially those spearheaded by the west. As a case in point, Iranians have fully complied with the nuclear agreement signed two years ago, and yet the United States has done the bare minimum on its end, if not violating the letter and spirit of the agreement altogether. From the Iranian perspective, there are many other examples of how the International community has failed Iran time and again. Two examples include aiding and abetting Saddam Hussein in his use of chemical weapons against Iran, and staying predominantly silent when the US shot down an Iranian passenger plane killing all 290 civilians on board. Logically, many Iranians second guess the genuineness of international agreements. From Iran's point of view, the Paris Agreement could be another example of an agreement, which may later be used as leverage to cause trouble and exert unwanted political pressure (for example if Iran does not meet its so-called non-binding emission reduction targets).

Yesterday one of my students asked me a barrage of questions: "Why should we join the Paris Agreement when it requires us to give detailed accounts of our various industrial sectors and greenhouse gas emissions? With this agreement aren't we handing over valuable information on a silver platter? After all, didn't the enemy use intelligence agencies to gather information about our nuclear program before conducting covert operations, sending malicious software, and ultimately assassinating our scientists?" After making his point, the student went on to end his questions with this punch line: "Can you guarantee that the information given to the west through the Paris Agreement will not be used to harm us down the road?"

3. Prioritizing air pollution over climate change: in recent years, Iran's cities have been grappling with serious air pollution problems. In fact, the city of Zabol in eastern Iran was recently named by the WHO as having the most polluted air in the world . Other cities are not much better. Every year, particularly during the winter, pollution gets so bad in Tehran on some days that the government has no choice but to shut down schools and advise the elderly and children to stay indoors. Under such dire circumstances, there are some Iranians who argue that all efforts and funds should go towards reducing emissions that decrease local air quality, not reducing carbon dioxide which is a non-poisonous and non-threatening gas on a local scale. To them, it seems ludicrous to use much needed funds to tackle carbon dioxide gas emissions when individuals are dying of inhaling carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and the like.

4. Comparison to other countries: this is where president Trump's decision to quit the Paris Agreement hits the hardest. I'm often asked why Iran should abide by an agreement from which one of the world's worst emitters of carbon dioxide gas has quit. To be honest, they have a point. But the questions go far beyond the United States. Another argument points at Iran's Nationally Determined Contributions compared to other oil producing countries. After all, countries such as Qatar and Bahrain have sufficed with giving general and non-exact commitments (hinting that they may be looking at the Paris Agreement as nothing more than a formality). Why then, they argue, should Iran which holds the world's largest reserves of oil and gas combined, be a proponent of the Paris Agreement? In the eyes of the Iranians opposing the Paris Agreement, from all the countries in the world, it would be logical that the country holding the largest reserves of fossil fuels (i.e. Iran) would like to see the least restrictions on their use. My opponent on the nationally televised debate argued: "The Europeans have no fossil fuels so it is logical for them to press for limitations on oil and gas to hamper our economic development. Why should we follow them blindly?"

5. Politics: unfortunately, everything in Iran is political. It is almost impossible to even take an academic stance without being accused of supporting one political faction or another. Since president Rouhani's government is in charge of the Department of Environment which has signed the Paris Agreement, then all of the agreement's proponents are accused of being the government's mouth pieces. Likewise, anyone who identifies with the right-wing opponents of Rouhani, will conveniently find fault in the Paris Agreement. In a country where politics reigns supreme on everyday decisions and stances, you can rest assured that much of the onslaught against the Paris Agreement, is in fact aggression towards the president who has permitted its signature.