Natural Disasters and the “Blame Game Theory” Narrative

Natural disasters in Aceh, North Sumatra, West Sumatra, and the surrounding areas are part of the overall impact of the global climate crisis experienced in several countries since the beginning of the year.

The focus on the causes of disasters is often directed towards narratives of anomalies or extreme weather. In several countries, the government tends to overlook and cover up public policy mistakes that are the root of the problem.

From January to November of this year, a series of natural disasters occurred in almost every continent, resulting in environmental, social, and economic impacts on the community.

In early January, a large fire swept through California, evolving into the Palisades Fire and Eaton Fire, which burned thousands of structures in Los Angeles County, United States.

This was followed by a combination of Santa Ana winds that caused embers to move at high speeds, forcing tens of thousands of residents to evacuate in a short period of time.

This fire has once again raised questions about increasingly unpredictable weather patterns. Researchers assess that warmer temperatures and drier vegetation are part of a long-term trend that increases the risk of forest fires.

The local government emphasized that such extreme conditions are difficult to anticipate even though the frequency of similar incidents has increased in recent years.

In March 2025, Bolivia faced severe flooding due to increased rainfall during an unusually prolonged wet season. Rivers overflowed rapidly, sweeping away low-lying settlements in their path, resulting in the deaths of more than 50 people.

The Bolivian government stated that the rate of rainfall is outside historical patterns and is supported by findings from climate experts regarding the existence of anomalies in regional atmospheric circulation patterns.

Flooding in Bolivia demonstrates the close relationship between global warming and the increasing risks of hydrometeorological events. Numerous studies have revealed that every rise in air temperature enables the atmosphere to hold more water vapor, ultimately increasing the potential for heavy rainfall in a short period.

The situation becomes increasingly dangerous when combined with social vulnerabilities due to residential areas that develop without considering disaster risk factors.

In Europe, that summer served as a reminder that the continent is also not immune to the effects of global warming. A heatwave peaked in France and Greece, which subsequently triggered wildfires in the Attica region.

The health crisis is under severe pressure due to a surge in cases of dehydration and heat stroke, especially among the elderly.

Continuing into June 2025, the Eastern Cape in South Africa was struck by severe flooding that resulted in the deaths of more than 100 people. A worse situation occurred in Pakistan, which experienced prolonged flooding from June 2025 to September 2025.

Meanwhile, North Vietnam has experienced severe flooding from late September 2025 to mid-October 2025, as tropical storms and atmospheric convergence have resulted in extreme rainfall lasting for several days.

The peak of the global disaster in 2025 occurred at the end of October 2025 with the formation of Hurricane Melissa over the ocean with very warm surface temperatures.

The storm devastated Jamaica, Cuba, and Hispaniola, forcing hundreds of thousands of residents to evacuate. More than 60 people have died, and economic damage has spread from infrastructure to the tourism sector, which has long been the economic backbone of the region.

Anomalies and extreme weather have finally struck Indonesia, particularly in Aceh, North Sumatra, and West Sumatra in November 2025. Tens of thousands of residents have been forced to evacuate, and hundreds of people have lost their lives. Damage to infrastructure and the paralysis of socio-economic activities have become unavoidable consequences.

The series of events throughout 2025 demonstrates a pattern of interconnected disasters that no longer stand as separate occurrences. The intensity and frequency indicate that climate change has entered a new phase characterized by more severe and frequent extreme events. Scientific evidence regarding this trend can no longer be viewed as an abstract warning for the future.

The climate crisis phenomenon that has triggered a series of natural disasters in recent years shows a recurring pattern of political communication.

Governments in many countries tend to reduce the causes of disasters to extreme weather alone. This narrative may seem reasonable at first glance, as stronger storms, higher rainfall, and heatwaves are indeed triggered by global warming.

When major floods occur, mitigation fails, or widespread forest fires happen, public officials tend to use phrases such as "climate anomaly," "unpredictable natural phenomena," or "unpreventable extreme weather." Such narratives are increasingly reinforced by scientific evidence from disaster management agencies and local meteorological bodies.

Behind this narrative, discourse analysis of such diction choices is not merely a scientific description, but rather a political instrument for deflecting responsibility. This is what is known as the strategy of blame game theory.

In blame game theory, potential blame actors will look for causes that are difficult to localize and unrelated to policy, making “weather” or “climate” the perfect target because they are beyond human control.

The research entitled Blame Games of Weather-Related Disasters: A Qualitative Research on Political Rhetoric of Government and Opposition in Türkiye (May 2025) by Melih Nadi Tutan explains this strategy in the context of the relationship between political policy and natural disasters in Turkey.

Tutan delves into discourse analysis on statements from politicians, transcripts of government speeches, and content in government media. The results indicate that the government seems to "ignore" public criticism of exploitative policies and places greater emphasis on the factors of extreme weather that occur.

Likewise, in a study by Cambridge University entitled Blame Shifting in Autocracies following Large-Scale Disasters (September 2025) which examined public perception of the government's discourse narrative.

Survey results indicate that the public exposed to the narrative "natural disasters are currently caused by extreme weather or anomalies" is less likely to demand reforms in spatial policy or stricter enforcement of environmental regulations.

A political ecology and disaster approach can complement the understanding of blame game theory strategies. Natural disasters are indeed caused, in part, by climate change, which results in intense rainfall, strong winds, and extreme temperatures. However, environmental vulnerability is entirely a product of socio-political factors.

Blaming natural factors is not only scientifically wrong, but also masks the socio-economic structures that create ecological injustice.

The government does not feel compelled to correct policy errors, while the public accepts disasters as inevitable, even destiny.

The future impact, when floods and landslides are understood as a result of extreme rainfall, is that the public does not perceive this as a consequence of exploitative policies for the benefit of a select few.

The epistemic framework that considers nature as the primary cause of disasters overlooks the fact that climate change is a result of human actions that accelerate emissions and damage land cover.

Many governments describe extreme weather as something that is entirely beyond their control, thus obscuring the moral and political responsibility. In fact, this issue requires acknowledgment of the socio-political dimensions that trigger environmental degradation.

Negligence in reading disasters systematically also prolongs the cycle of socio-economic losses. Hundreds to thousands of victims that have emerged this year indicate that policies that are not sensitive to risks will always exacerbate the impacts of natural events.

Responsive management must take into account economic activities, population distribution, and spatial planning regulations resulting in certain levels of vulnerability.

The government needs to review the direction of development by considering the environment's ability to support human activities.

The formulation of policies must incorporate the variable of social vulnerability so that no community group bears the heaviest burden in any extreme event. This effort can only proceed if a comprehensive evaluation is conducted on the regulations regarding land use and ecosystem protection.

Particularly for Indonesia, the country will not run out of scientific researchers who can contribute ideas to provide a strong foundation for sustainable development programs.

The integration of climate science and equitable governance is key to long-term resilience. However, the question remains: is the government bold enough to side with the interests of the community and the environment over the interests of a select few businesses? (LITBANG KOMPAS)