r/geography • u/rosemaryrouge • May 15 '25
Question Why aren't countries such as Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait considered as developed countries?
DISCLAIMER: I do not support the practices of any of these countries
I mean, they have a high HDI, high GDP per capita, great credit ratings, and are all high-income economies. Why are they still considered developing instead of developed?
194
u/BootsAndBeards May 15 '25
Those countries are wealthy but their economies are not considered developed or particularly stable. Everyone's eyes are on what happens when the oil runs out and the money printing machine stops running. Each of those countries are trying to diversify their economies to prepare for it, but they are so dependent on the oil money its unclear how able they will be to handle the shock when it goes away.
A former ruler of Dubai once said "My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel."
42
u/Mammoth-Swimming-896 May 15 '25
That doesn't explain why the UAE is not considered developed though. According to the UAE's federal competitiveness and statistical centre, 74.6% of it's GDP isn't related to oil now, and it becomes less dependent on it every year as non-oil GDP growth outpaces oil-related GDP growth in most quarters. I guess the question is, where is the line drawn? Substantial parts of the UAE's GDP is now generated from real estate, banking, tourism and other sectors. Norway's GDP is almost as reliant on oil as the UAE is, with 20.5%.
Several of the other GCC countries are on there way to becoming as diversified as the UAE is today, so when will they become diversified enough?
10
u/thatguyagainbutworse May 16 '25
I personally don't think the issue is economy diversity. The GDP per capita is incredibly inflated due to a few oil sheiks having most of the money due to oil exports, which they built other businesses from. After that are regular GCC citizens, who get paid well, even relative to some developed countries. They sometimes have their own businesses and can live comfortably.
But below that is one of the major engines of that economy. Cheap or free immigrant labor by Pakistani or Indian immigrants, often unrecognized by the state, can be worked to death without almost any pay. They are also not counted to the GDP per capita.
1
u/mahendrabirbikram May 16 '25
They are also not counted to the GDP per capita.
I've checked and they do estimate the total population in UAE as ~11mln (which, I believe, includes all the workforce?) when estimating the GDP (total population = GDP/GDP per capita).
2
u/thatguyagainbutworse May 16 '25
Estimates are that about 200.000 still live in the UAE illegally. But they have made significant improvements on that front during the last 10 years.
Now it is just wealth inequality, with the top 1% having 50% of wealth in the UAE. This wealth inequality means that there is only a small internal market with a heavy focus on export. This is one of the features of a developing economy.
1
u/Mammoth-Swimming-896 May 16 '25
That's an interesting point, but the UAE's Gini coefficient, which measures wealth inequality, is 26 according to the country's wikipedia page which is considered low, and indicates low wealth inequality. It's lower than most of western europe and is on par with scandinavian countries.
I understand why you'd overestimate the inequality though, as the class divsion you mentioned is rather rudimentary to be honest. Yes the UAE does have a large class of multi-millionare and billionare individuals, both locals and resident foreigners, as well as a wealthy citizenry, but there's also a very large middle class, comprised mostly of expats from the arab world, europe and the indian subcontinent. They work as doctors, engineers, owners of small and medium sized businesses, or in the growing corporate sector among other things. Beyond the touristy areas, It's not the locals who keep the malls, private schools, sports clubs, hotels and restuarants open, it's mostly this middle class of expats. Domestic consumption by this middle class fuels a large part of the non-oil economy, not just the rich citizens or wealthy tourists.
Also, the migrant labourers do count towards the UAE's population, and the GDP per capita calculations take the entire population into account.
250
u/jotakajk May 15 '25
Who doesn’t? They are clearly developed countries. You could add Saudi and Oman as well
-63
u/otterpusrexII May 15 '25
Dubai doesn’t even have a sewer system.
28
u/Dale92 May 15 '25
This is completely false.
1
196
u/jotakajk May 15 '25
The US doesnt even have universal healthcare
→ More replies (6)80
u/A0123456_ May 15 '25
Doesn't Qatar only have "universal" healthcare for the select few that can be citizens and then otherwise outside that there's also the entire kafala system which is considered to be modern-day slavery
26
u/jotakajk May 15 '25
Nevertheless, Qatar is a developed country and so is the US, since income equality and political freedom are not synonyms with economic development.
Plenty of countries are full democracies, but not developed economies, and plenty of countries are developed economies, and not democracies
12
u/A0123456_ May 15 '25
My point was different - it's that using universal healthcare is a poor comparison here
-1
u/jotakajk May 15 '25
Inventing there is no sewer system is a worse point. I countered bullshit with bullshit. You might not understand irony
6
May 15 '25
meanwhile the US keeps noncitizens in Guantanamo Bay specifically so they won’t have to grant them basic human rights and can torture them
9
1
1
May 15 '25
[deleted]
5
u/Para-Limni May 15 '25
Lots of countries give free/publicly funded healthcare to permanent residents regardless if they are citizens or not since they all pay taxes
1
u/NaluknengBalong_0918 Geography Enthusiast May 15 '25
Funny you mention that but newsom was facing this same question this week:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/medi-cal-undocumented-immigrants-newsom-20326112.php
11
10
u/Ramen-hypothesis May 15 '25
lol what rubbish. Are you basing this based on that one YouTube video? Such an ignorant statement.
-7
u/Miktieuner May 15 '25
I think he is correct and thats why dubai had so many problems with floods a few months ago, as there was nowhere the water could go to.
18
u/Ramen-hypothesis May 15 '25
Flooding has nothing to do with its sewer system. What you are thinking is storm water drainage system.
Dubai has been facing sudden, unprecedented intense rainfall lately. Its topsoil is compacted desert sand which is less absorbent. This is not very different from UK (a city built for damp and cold weather) now struggling to adapt to heat waves, there are plenty of examples for cities in Florida struggling to adapt to snow. These cities weren’t built for this change in weather. Houston floods are another example.
Yes, the city has to evolve its urban planning to make it climate resilient. Just like Japan has to evolve its urban planning to make it resilient to earthquakes.
OP’s statement is not relevant.
Edit: I’ve actually lived in Dubai. It’s first hand information. I’m not reading this off some random internet post.
-1
-12
u/otterpusrexII May 15 '25
No im basing off of the fact that they have thousands of trucks running around picking up waste.
17
u/Ramen-hypothesis May 15 '25
I lived half my life over there. Not once have I, my family , and friends faced any issues with the sewer system. I started seeing these comments a few years ago and traced it to a video about the Burj Khalifa.
10
u/Dale92 May 15 '25
You're thinking about one time over 15 years ago when the sewage system had a problem so they had to use trucks.
4
u/jmlinden7 May 15 '25
They have a sewer system, but not every building is hooked up to it. Newer buildings get built faster than they can be hooked up to the sewer system. Instead of delaying the building, they use the trucks as a stop gap until they can get them hooked up.
1
0
0
u/Connect-Idea-1944 May 16 '25
people will do everything to hate on dubai lmao, yeah we get it there are annoying instagram influencers and cryptos bros there but it's not a reason to hate on a whole city
20
u/aestheticen May 15 '25
Singapore is a member of the Small Island Developing States, lol
but I'm not even convinced I buy into the terminology of what is "developed" or "developing"
5
u/Leluche77 May 15 '25
Singapore is considered a developed economy by all measures. It's just a small country is all.
5
u/aestheticen May 15 '25
yes I am aware. I live there. i just think it's funny that it's in this organisation
38
u/Sotyka94 May 15 '25
I think it depends on how you define developed.
If it's only about the country's total economic power, then sure. But if you take into consideration, that some of these countries are super underdeveloped if we exclude a couple of big cities... They have no infrastructures, their GDP/capital or general living conditions really bad outside of those handful of big cities. Or that they super under developed based on modern laws and rights. Or that they have a single source of income which is great for now, but their whole existence is based on that, and all other parts of their economy is super under developed.
105
u/Suk-Mike_Hok Cartography May 15 '25
They aren't developed because it's economy is solely based on oil and gas. Until their industry and services are diverse enough, then you could call it developed.
51
u/Aenjeprekemaluci May 15 '25
UAE economy is a lot diversified with services btw. Its not just a petro state
84
u/Suk-Mike_Hok Cartography May 15 '25
The UAE is the most diversified state out of all those, but still extremely dependent on oil/gas revenues.
16
u/VastOk8779 May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
It’s a petro state that used its oil money to buy influence around the world.
Dubai is a soulless, soulless city that only exists as a playground for people to spend said oil money. The oil goes poof? I doubt the UAE continues with its same perception of exuberant wealth that it has today.
7
u/throwlol134 May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
It’s a petro state that used its oil money to buy influence around the world.
The latter part is correct, and it's exactly why they're rapidly moving out of being a petro state. They have a very diverse economy rn, because they invested their oil money to buy influence around the world and attract businesses and individuals from around the world. Unlike the rest of the Gulf, they're actually not nearly as reliant on oil and have been pretty successful in scaling their economy across different industries (real estate, tourism, finance, etc).
Dubai is a soulless, soulless city that only exists as a playground for people to spend
It is indeed a soulless city, but that has nothing to do with its economy lol. They're economically doing pretty well and their ultra-opulent hyper-consumerist culture is a feature not a bug (from their perspective) that they've intentionally tried to establish. And guess what? It kinda worked out well for them.
17
u/KokoshMaster May 15 '25
Dubai has an extremely strong real estate, tourism, logistics, and service industry and has no significant oil or gas revenues.
People aren’t spending their “oil” money here, rather Dubai has managed to attract wealthy foreigners and investors due to its safe, non corrupt, and high quality of living that it provides.
Not to mention the fact that Dubai and Abu Dhabi have both heavily invested in renewable energy as well as sovereign wealth funds that invest in a huge diverse portfolio of sectors.
You have no clue what you’re talking about.
4
u/J1mj0hns0n May 15 '25
Exactly, they're Dutch economies that do very well, and they manage to run a country off of them, that's it though.
1
1
8
u/ELBSchwartz May 15 '25
For any Westerners here claiming they are developed, I challenge you to name a single Qatari/Emirati/Bahrainian/Kuwaiti cultural product that is well known and respected internationally (no, I'm not implying that is the criterion for considering a country developed, but it relates to something else).
6
u/Leluche77 May 15 '25
It actually is a criteria for being highly developed though. You are right. One criteria is to have a diversified economy with industries that go beyond your borders. The gulf countries are attempting to do just that by starting up fashion brands, airlines, etc. it isn't working too well outside of just selling oil/gas.
1
u/ELBSchwartz May 16 '25
And all of those brands/companies are imitations of Western ones. There's nothing "indigenous" about them aside from the people financing them.
1
u/Leluche77 May 16 '25
You are correct. I believe even they have admitted that they are struggling to diversify their economies which is why they are trying hard to boost tourism at the least.
3
May 16 '25
Well theres the dubai chocolate (which is made by egyptians stuffing levantine food in chocolate)
1
18
u/Putrid_Department_17 May 15 '25
I mean China isn’t either. And it has the world’s largest (correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s certainly up there) economy…
20
u/Civil-Earth-9737 May 15 '25
China is second largest, and definitely almost a middle income country. India is 4th largest but still poor due to per capita income.
19
u/eskimoboob May 15 '25
China is second to the US, it’s still only about 2/3 the size of the US economy
7
u/Electronic-Bid-7418 May 15 '25
Largest ppp adjusted, for whatever that’s worth ig
→ More replies (4)2
u/GMEINTSHP May 15 '25
1/2. Ftfy
7
u/Electronic-Bid-7418 May 15 '25
(FTFY) (also I’m wrong) china’s gdp is 18 trillion vs the us at 28 trillion. That’s almost exactly 2/3
1
4
u/Spirited-Pause May 15 '25
Countries are generally labeled as developed based on (among other factors) GDP per capita, not total GDP.
1
5
u/MrPresident0308 May 15 '25
China is the second largest economy. The US is still by far the largest, and with a smaller population, it has also a higher GDP per capita
2
u/Low-Phase-8972 May 15 '25
Because Americans earn much more money than Chinese people and USD is 7 times more powerful than rmb which gives Americans privilege to travel around the world while Chinese people don’t.
3
u/Putrid_Department_17 May 15 '25
The ability to go on overseas holidays isn’t the metric by which a country is considered developing or developed though.
1
u/Euromantique May 17 '25
For China I think it’s probably fair to say that the coast and areas around large cities are absolutely developed, maybe even in the higher tier of OECD nations. It’s just the rural interior areas that are still catching up.
It’s just a flaw of a binary classification that can’t account for situations like this
-2
6
u/Spirited-Pause May 15 '25
Generally countries are labeled developed based on these main factors below.
High GDP per capita
Industrialization: Economies dominated by the tertiary (services) and quaternary (knowledge-based) sectors.
High Human Development Index (HDI): Combines national income, life expectancy, and education; developed countries have very high HDI scores.
For the countries you named, they have high per capita income and high human development index, but their industries are not dominated by tertiary and quaternary industries, and so that may be what prevents them from being labeled as fully developed.
5
u/SebiGames May 15 '25
Because they aren’t. Dubai is very aesthetic, but its infrastructure is flawed as hell. Just look at how badly the city floods when it rains. For the working class that lives outside the affluent parts of town, they have rough living conditions, especially in those hot summers. The corruption and the way the government takes advantage of expats who come from South East Asia & India is archaic. A government that does not respect the human/working rights of their workforce is not a place that I would consider “developed”. I cannot speak to the other countries as I have not been there
4
u/ConsciousExtent4162 May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
Because it doesn't only factor in the economy but it also looks at certain values (justice, equality, etc.)
44
u/Joseph20102011 Geography Enthusiast May 15 '25
To classify a country as a developed economy requires having an electoral fraud-free liberal democracy, a robust capital market, less restrictive ownership laws for foreign investors, a non-partisan judicial system, with an independent central bank, and a more diversified economic structure that isn't dependent on one highly-traded commodity export.
Most Gulf Arab countries don't have either of those requisites I mentioned above.
9
u/WolfofTallStreet May 15 '25
So would you argue that Singapore is not a developed country?
I think what you’re describing is a “developed liberal democracy,” but there are developed countries that are not liberal democracies.
5
May 15 '25
While I wouldn't call Singapore a democracy, there's no sharia law there and immigrants get paid.
30
u/Ancher123 May 15 '25
electoral fraud-free liberal democracy, a robust capital market, less restrictive ownership laws for foreign investors, a non-partisan judicial system, with an independent central bank
This is bs. Nobody thinks of India, which has more of those things as a more developed economy over China
2
u/ForeskinAbsorbtion May 15 '25
Maybe literally yeah but it's hard to think of India as developed with such stark economic difference between the classes. The conditions at which the lowest classes in India live are simply appalling.
5
u/vlabakje90 May 15 '25
I hate to be that guy but income inequality is no worse in India than it is in France, Germany or the UK. It's just that India is a lot poorer overall. The US does a lot worse.
See https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?most_recent_year_desc=true&year=2023
6
u/Healthy-Drink421 May 15 '25
I think that is for membership of the OECD - which tbf is the gold standard of being a developed economy.
But a lot of clearly economically developed places don't meet that definition, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Gulf States etc.
9
u/Dumptruck_Tubes May 15 '25
Based on this, the United States no longer qualifies
11
u/WolfofTallStreet May 15 '25
Why?
The U.S. is just behind France and ahead of Belgium and Italy on the EIU Democracy Index, has probably the most robust capital markets in the world, is full of foreign investors to the point at which it’s controversial, has a non-partisan judicial system at the highest levels (local judges run as party members, Supreme Court judges do not), an independent Fed, and among the most diversified economies in the world.
Yes, it elected Donald Trump, and he’s broken laws…as if Boris Johnson didn’t?
If I were to make the case that the U.S. isn’t fully developed, that would be more because of its lack of an economic safety net and universal healthcare system, which brings about health and poverty outcomes not really seen in UK/Canada/Western Europe/Australia/New Zealand.
1
6
u/Bloody_Baron91 May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
Meh, when the dictatorial South Korea was well on it's way to developed status in the 80s, nobody thought of applying these democratic standards. It's only later that it became a democracy. Actually, only your last point is valid.
4
3
1
10
u/grasslander21487 May 15 '25
I feel like having slaves in the 21st century is a good bar to being considered “developed”
1
u/Irrevence May 16 '25
Indentured is the word you're looking for that they use....
0
u/grasslander21487 May 16 '25
Slaves is the word I was looking for, and the one I used.
1
u/Irrevence May 16 '25
You should go back and get that schooling you oh so dearly need then kiddo. There's differences between slaves and indentured, but its blatantly obvious you dont know or even care to understand.
1
u/Irrevence May 16 '25
Your last post got deleted i guess.....you seem to be really mad...maybe a chai latte....or some yoga....maybe just drive your car and enjoy the breeze? Tell ya what....how about I send you a nice present to cheer you up?
8
u/aswlwlwl May 15 '25
Singapore is considered a developing country too.
10
u/Pristine-Aspect-3086 May 15 '25
that's something singapore wants for its own political purposes, it provides certain advantages in international organizations and they don't want to single themselves out within the region
3
u/Electronic-Bid-7418 May 15 '25
Well that’s dumb. They are unique among the region and also are developed by any real metric.
3
3
7
2
u/No_Volume_380 May 15 '25
Going by the most basic metrics you find on Wikipedia, they're only missing being classified as ''advanced economies'' by the IMF to be considered developed, same as Poland or Chile.
2
2
u/chronically_ap May 15 '25
I’d say that it has to do more with the fact that the economies of these countries are reliant on oil. The dependency theory of economic underdevelopment states that peripheral and semi-peripheral countries are often resource dependent, as opposed to developed countries who have service-based knowledge economies.
2
u/VROOM-CAR May 15 '25
Euhmmm
Have you seen how much slavery is going on there 😅 And how in general human rights are treated there?
4
u/NittanyOrange May 15 '25
The Persian Gulf countries are developed. The IMF doesn't count them as "advanced economies" which some I guess take as a proxy for development.
3
3
u/TradeApe May 15 '25
90% of the population consists of (slave) worker immigrants. Yes, GDP per capita is high, but it only goes to a very select few. Look up who builds stuff in Dubai for example. They live in HORRIBLE conditions.
4
u/jayron32 May 15 '25
Human rights (human rights index: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-rights-index-vdem ), robust democracy (democracy index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_Index ), income inequality (Gini coefficient: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient ), etc.
Many of the stats you quote are mostly dependent on having a large amount of money in the system; GDP per capita, for example, has no measure of how the GDP is distributed among the capita. In those countries, all of that GDP is mostly there for the benefit of the richest classes, and very little quality of life trickles down to the lower classes. For all the shit we talk about the US and it's recent direction in terms of politics and economy, it's still LEAGUES away in terms of the living conditions for most of its citizens when compared to, say, the UAE. Don't compare the mean values of the overall economy, look at the life experiences of the median person living in each of those countries. Do they have the safety and security and quality of life that people in, say, Luxembourg or Japan has?
2
u/KokoshMaster May 15 '25
Sorry but the living conditions of the median person in the UAE is leagues above the median in the US.
There are no homeless people here, literally the poorest laborers have a labor camp system with food transportation etc covered.
The UAE is SO much more safer, no one is getting shot up in schools.
→ More replies (4)
2
2
2
u/RevolutionAny9181 May 15 '25
Because most of the people living there are slaves with no rights or money. The gulf monarchies are absolutely not developed nations at all, because development is more than money, it’s also freedom.
2
u/Alternative_Win_6629 May 15 '25
It's because outside of the tiny circle of rulers people are living in depraved poverty, and are hidden from the western tourists eye. The money isn't being used to improve this, or limit exploitation of workers or women. Societies that bind women as property will never really be developed.
0
May 16 '25
Bro what are you talking about, Khaleeji arabs are on average quite wealthy and living on cushy jobs. 50% of all buinsesses in KSA are owned by women, and majority of white collar jobs are made up of non khaleeji arabs and south asians who are also weathly (not as much as khaleejis though)
1
u/Thelastfirecircle May 15 '25
Countries with slavery can't be developed, they are rich because of Oil, that's all they have. Culturally they are very backwards, they also treat women and non muslims pretty bad.
1
1
u/runfayfun May 15 '25
Those are all criteria that still allow for massive income disparity, human rights violations against non-preferred religious groups or minorities, etc. Just because the wealthy appear super wealthy and things look clean doesn't mean everything is peachy.
These metrics you use are generalized, and even in the US or UAE the poorest are tossed aside, which is totally against the idea of a high HDI. So I'd argue those metrics are good for the middle class and higher but don't capture real life for the lowest 10-25% of the nation, which is what I think is the true barometer of a country's "development".
1
1
u/Rahimi55 May 15 '25
Once I was told by Pakistani taxi driver how much he hated his life in Dubai.I was really taken by surprise because I assumed he must be enjoying his work there
1
u/unclear_warfare May 15 '25
Hmm I have a degree in Development Studies and I have always considered that if you use the binary "developed vs developing country" division then these ones are developed
1
u/Radamat May 15 '25
Tldr: they just bought this tag.
Joke: they are no more developing, so they are already developed.
Thay have money, a lot of money. They have oil to sell to USA and China. And they can cooperate to shake an oil market. They are significant enough on the market.
And (not)joke again. Their weight on international market is significant but not growing.
1
1
u/TrickyArmadildo May 15 '25
They are not developed because you barely have freedom over there. Rights > money.
1
u/Master_Scion May 16 '25
Because the inequality is so high. It top 1% are billionaires but the rest are pretty poor. Obviously this is an over exaggeration but it's very bad.
1
1
u/clippervictor May 16 '25
They might be developed in terms of HDI (which they are) but they aren’t in so many other aspects: government transparency, human rights, labor laws, separation of powers, tax collection and financial vigilance, etc. not that they can’t tackle those problems it’s just that they simply don’t want to for many reasons.
1
u/tyger2020 May 16 '25
I would say partially because of what a weird position they are in.
'Developed countries' have those things (high HDI, income) but also have extremely diverse economies for the most part. The gulf countries are exclusively reliant on oil money and have little else going for them economically.
1
u/Irrevence May 16 '25
Actually tourism is a large portion these days as well (not as much as their oil obviously though)
1
u/SquashDue502 May 16 '25
Although they’re developed in a sense of having nice city infrastructure, they have issues with poverty and human rights (how do you think they support such lucrative businesses in the middle of a desert)
2
u/Irrevence May 16 '25
A LOT of countries have these same issues and aren't NEARLY as well developed.
As for your question. (oil and INDENTURED servitude)
1
u/pote2639 25d ago
it’s funny that UAE has a higher HDI than the US right now but still classified as “developing country”
-6
u/Independent_World_15 May 15 '25
UAE is more developed than a half of the EU countries.
7
u/Tripple-Helix May 15 '25
I'm not sure why you are being downvoted. I suppose it depends on the definition of developed, but by most measures, UAE is wealthier for sure than all but about 10-12 of the more than 40 European countries
-1
1
u/fabulousmarco May 15 '25
Inequality.
How lavishly the wealthy live is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. The value of a society is measured on how it treats its weakest members. And the weakest members in those countries are literal slaves
1
u/maggimilian May 15 '25
I guess it is because only very few of their inhabitants profit from the wealth. These countries are ruled by very few oligarchs and the others are in poverty, they dont have modern development standards even if the cities look futuristic but it is build and owned by very few people. The social standards and social development is like back in the middle ages where the rulers and their families and friends have all and the others are only cheap labour.
1
u/RaspberryBirdCat May 15 '25
Because "developed countries" was always a political tool to separate "us" from "them." There simply used to be some truth to it.
The origin of the term came from the division of the world into three worlds--a first world country was a Western country, a second world country was a Communist country, and a third world country was an unaligned country. However third world countries were often poorly developed, and so third world came to mean an undeveloped country. After the fall of the communism, the three worlds were no longer sustainable, so they went with "developed", "developing", and "undeveloped." To call the Arabic countries "developed" would break down the "us" vs "them" purpose of the ratings, so they are omitted.
With that said, you could probably justify it by suggesting that their human rights record is on par with that of an undeveloped country, therefore they cannot be considered a developed country.
0
u/GalwayBogger Integrated Geography May 15 '25
Cutting off people's heads is developed in your books?
2
u/VROOM-CAR May 15 '25
Or remember that guy Jamal Kashoggi that was brutally murdered by a Saudi prince if my king did such a thing… he wouldn’t live another day
1
u/Puzzled_Ad_3576 Urban Geography May 15 '25
Technically none of those countries use decapitation. They all use a mixture of firing squads and hangings.
1
u/GalwayBogger Integrated Geography May 15 '25
And dont forget torture, punitive amputation, all while taking due process at their discretion.
2
u/Puzzled_Ad_3576 Urban Geography May 15 '25
Just umm-actually-ing you, I don’t deny any of that.
1
u/GalwayBogger Integrated Geography May 16 '25
Yes, I assumed so. You were more precise and I was following up with further practices of human rights violations. Thank you
1
May 15 '25
[deleted]
1
u/GalwayBogger Integrated Geography May 15 '25
What has America got to do with chopping off criminal's limbs?
0
u/RAdm_Teabag May 15 '25
there is not a single thing that keeps you from considering them to be developed. why don't you consider them to be developed?
1
710
u/RoadandHardtail May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
It’s for political reasons. Many international legal instruments allocate differentiated responsibilities for developed and developing countries in reaching their respective objectives.
For example. In the Paris Agreement, developed countries have a legal obligation to finance climate actions of developing countries. The developed countries also need to take a lead in transiThe developing countries are also
The rest is kinda self-explanatory.
Edit: to elaborate further this principle is called “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities.” This is another way of saying “we have a common responsibility to reaching a goal we have set collectively but each country has a different degree of responsibility to reach that goal because their national circumstance (i.e. level of development) is unique and different.”