Should Africans pursue Stephen Harper for crimes against humanity?
The Africa Progress Report 2015 suggests they may have a solid moral, if not necessarily legal, case.
Led by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the Africa Progress Panel highlights Canada and Australia as two countries that "have withdrawn entirely from constructive international engagement on climate." The eminent and certainly mainstream group concludes that Ethiopia, Kenya and Rwanda have shown "far higher level of ambition" to lessen CO2 emissions than Canada.
The report, which was released last week, adds to a significant body of evidence showing that anthropogenic global warming poses a particularly profound threat to Africans. Although hardest hit by climate change, the terrible irony is that Africa among all continents is least responsible for the problem.
If nothing is done to curtail greenhouse gas emissions average temperatures may rise 7 degrees Celsius in southern Africa and 8 degrees Celsius in the north by century's end. Reaching nearly twice the global average, this would destabilize human life on large swaths of the continent.
Still, a skeptic might argue, how does this amount to charging Stephen Harper with crimes against humanity? Doesn't that require some form of mass murder or genocide?
Back in 2012, the Climate Vulnerability Monitor concluded that climate disturbances were responsible for 400,000 deaths per year, mostly in Africa. Nigerian ecologist Nnimmo Bassey has dubbed growing carbon emissions a "death sentence for Africa" while Naomi Klein reports that "African delegates at UN climate summits have begun using words like 'genocide' to describe the collective failure to lower emissions."
Various ecological, economic and social factors explain the continent's vulnerability. Most Africans are directly dependent on resource sectors -- fisheries, forestry and agriculture -- that are particularly vulnerable to climate conditions. More than two-thirds of the continent are subsistence farmers who largely rely on natural rainfall, rather than irrigation, to water their crops. Additionally, large swaths of the continent are arid and a third of Africa's productive area is already classified as dry land. As such, subsistence farmers' crop yields and incomes are easily damaged by reduced or intermittent rainfall. According to Tanzanian Minister of State for the Environment Binilith Mahenge, "global warming of 2 degrees celsius would put over 50 per cent of the African continent's population at risk of undernourishment."
CO2 induced food shortages are not in some far off dystopian future. A study by Britain's Met Office concluded that global warming sparked a major famine in Somalia in 2011 during which 50,000 Somalis died.
While water shortages represent a threat to many, an excess of this same element poses a hazard elsewhere. A quarter of Africa's population lives within 100 kilometres of the continent's 38,000 kilometres coastline. Without significant investments to mitigate risks to major metropolises, such as Dar es Salaam, Mombasa and Lagos, the threat of flooding looms.
Increasing the strain on governance structures, climate change has already exacerbated inequities and ethnic divisions in parts of the continent. Climate change may well propel large areas of Africa into a downward cycle, further undermining the capacity of communities and governments to cope.
But most African governments can contribute little to curtail runaway global warming because their countries' carbon footprints are negligible compared to the biggest capitalist economies. Per capita emissions in most African countries amount to barely 1 per cent of Canada's rate. In Uganda, Congo, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Rwanda and Mozambique, per capita emissions comprise less than 1/150th of Canada's average.
Canadian officialdom has done little to regulate tar sands emissions and has, in fact, subsidized its expansion. The Conservative government has campaigned aggressively against any international effort to reduce carbon emissions from fuel sources, which might impact sales of Alberta bitumen.
Despite the rising toll of climate change in Africa, the Canadian government pushed to grow the global "carbon bomb" in international forums. At every turn, Harper's Conservatives have blocked progress on setting minimally serious targets for reducing CO2 emissions, repeatedly receiving the Colossal Fossil given out by hundreds of environmental groups to the country that did the most to undermine international climate negotiations meetings. At last week's G7 meeting, Canadian officials reportedly sought to undermine German chancellor Angela Merkel's bid for a statement committing countries to a low carbon economy by 2050.
Under Conservative government leadership, Canada became the first country to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement committing leading industrial economies to reducing GHG emissions below 1990 levels by 2012.
In addition to undermining international climate negotiations and the efforts of other nations to reduce GHGs, the Harper government made a mockery of its own commitments. As part of the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, Ottawa pledged to reduce carbon emissions 17 per cent by 2020 (from the levels in 2005). Five years later, however, Environment Canada admitted this target would not be reached. In fact, Environment Canada suggested emissions would rise 20 per cent by 2020 and even higher afterwards.
In a sign of Ottawa's near total indifference to the impact of global warming in Africa, the Conservatives pulled out of an international accord to study the consequences of desertification, a process ravaging parts of the African continent. In 2013, Canada withdrew from the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in countries seriously affected by drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa.
Adopted in 1994, this international convention collects and shares scientific information about drought and ways to curb its spread. By becoming the sole nation outside the convention, Canada saved itself a paltry $283,000. While the savings barely registered in the federal government's $260 billion budget, the message was clear.
Clearly Harper's Conservative government has wilfully ignored the interests of Africans and pursued an environmental, economic and political course that has already killed hundreds of thousands.
In a just world a Fulani pastoralist in Burkina Faso would have a forum to pursue Stephen Harper for crimes against humanity.
MORE ON HUFFPOST: