Zimpapers Logo

Stephen Mpofu Correspondent
The climate is increasingly and irretrievably heating up, raising fears that our planet earth might become inhabitable in the not so distant future, if scientific knowledge gathered in the West is anything to go by.

For instance, international press reports quoting American Environmental Scientists said earlier this week that if no drastic action was taken by all nations to curb global warming and its effects on the climate it would, not might, be almost impossible for small passenger airlines flying regional routes to take off into the skies.

Much bigger passenger airlines than those now plying international routes would have to been deployed to ply their trade on all routes and from extensively extended runways — something that will obviously cost astronomical amounts of money for operators.

What the reports also suggest is that small airlines such as Zimbabwe’s along with similar ones in many African countries might be grounded for lack of money to buy bigger planes in addition to providing other, requisite facilities.

Equally detrimental to countries will be the inability of smaller planes to transport cargo, so that trade will become another victim in the same way as cargo ships will find it increasingly difficult to operate on seas severely destabilised by the effects of climate change resulting from global warming.

Add to humanity’s woes above catastrophic effects that aggravated climate change will bring to bear on humanity, especially in developing nations such as those in Africa, Zimbabwe included, where food production remains the prime occupation for the people with normal rainfall patterns a vital necessity.

Many countries, our own included, have in the past experienced lean rainfall or more droughts because of the effects of global warming so that they have had to import food to supplement what was realised locally.

With the prospects of climate change getting worse, it means that recurrent droughts are likely to become more widespread in Africa and elsewhere with little or no rainfall to germinate food crop seeds, or floods wiping off what crops are available, thus making future prospects for millions of people on our increasingly beleaguered earth very grim indeed.

Yet in spite of the frightening picture that emerges from scientific knowledge, total, global unanimity in fighting the effects of climate change remains a far cry.

For instance, is it not a tragedy, less so a shame, that notwithstanding the glaring, devastating effects of a climate sabotaged by humanity itself a super power such as the United States of America should decide to withdraw from the accord arising out of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris in 2015 to try to make our planet a better place to live for all?

America is known to be an unrepentant polluter of the atmosphere, having for years been constantly unwilling to modify its factory chimneys to reduce toxic gases spewed into the atmosphere.

The reason for that defiance is apparently a fear that costs incurred on modifying the factories would be passed on to consumers, thereby making American exports less competitive on the world market.

What is even more difficult to understand is that some among the Big League guys or G20 members condone America’s withdrawal from the climate change agreement on making our globe safer, justifying this by saying that the pull out did not encourage other countries to also turn their backs on moves agreed to combat global warming.

But how can America be given carte blanche right to thump its nose on an accord that is meant to safeguard the lives of all humanity?

While America is forking out millions of dollars to build a wall to prevent Mexicans freely crossing into that country, it does not possess the ability to erect an impregnable barrier against its polluted air flowing over and contaminating the rest of the world.

So, what really is the rationale for allowing the Trump administration to get away with murder, or is it because the USA is a member of the Big League of rich nations that arrogate unto themselves the right to dictate and control smaller nations; otherwise why have sanctions not been imposed on America for defying measures by the UN to fight climate change by pulling out of an otherwise unanimous decision on giving the world climate a new lease of life?

This pen believes, and with justification, that had a small fly said to hell with the climate change outcome it would immediately have had crippling sanctions imposed on it. Zimbabwe is an example of the duplicity of Big Brother Western imperialist nations.

A small people believing that a protracted armed struggle has at last, in 1980, given them freedom and independence take the next logical step by acquiring land previously stolen from them by white settlers. But what happens to them?

Crippling financial and economic sanctions are imposed by the West as punishment for a land reform programme meant to empower our people for self-determination through food self-sufficiency.

The embargo prevents foreign capital inflows and the economy is crippled with company closures, job losses and turmoil as hunger pervades homes.

Then add to this the audacity exhibited by cheap seekers of political power blaming the incumbent Zanu-PF Government allegedly for running down the country when the effects of sanctions should tell them an eloquent story behind the economic challenges our country is facing. Would anyone blame the masses who benefited from the agrarian revolution for branding as sell-outs those Zimbabwe’s who ignore the story and effects of sanctions for working in cahoots with the imperialist West to try to bring about regime change, thereby creating an opportunity for them to worm their way into power?

Patriots should use the harmonised elections next year to give imperialist suckers their just deserts.

It is the view of this pen that progressive forces across the globe should interlock their moral principles and responsibilities to bring about an end to irresponsible human activity endangering our climate through global warming as well as well as an end to wars, rampant global crimes as well as other social pathologies by which our earth is riven.

But of course some of the offenders above do not believe that their irresponsible actions constitute end times, holding the view that only God can and will bring this age to its end.

However, unrepentant wrongdoers should not exonerate themselves from God’s anger by performing acts that endanger the lives of God’s people.

In spite of the confusion and agony in which the world is embroiled, God fearing people should regard as a solace for their consolation the reality that the Lord is busy working out his purposes for his covenant people, Israel and the Church through restoration before the return to earth of his son, Jesus Christ.

The restoration of the symbolic Fig tree, or Israel, truly got under way in 1948 when the Jews the Lord had scattered abroad returned to their new state of Israel in Palestine and in 1967 proceeded to take administration of the ancient city of Jerusalem.

The restoration continues today for God’s other covenant people, the Church as symbolically represented by the Vine tree.

Now, closer to home the question that remains to be answered by the Church itself and by the people in general is how near to, or far from, God’s timeline for restoration is the vine as the age irrevocably draws to a close?

In other words, does the Church which came into being with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, project the word as a mirror in which people examine themselves to discover if they live in Christ and He in them, to receive and live with him eternally when he returns, or if they are candidates for eternal damnation as rebels.

Thus, the Church will truly pass as the body of Christ if it lives up to what God expects of it as a custodian of his creation.