So, you are right, but in Iran's case, the current regime pretty much did the opposite of anything you should have done, while also chopping of their hands to do anything more.
But the problems are on different time scales and spheres of influence.
Iran can’t do anything on their own against climate change. But they can decide to fund water projects instead of bombs.
It’s a bit like saying: I went to the beach for a day and got sunburned. It’s climate change!
Yes the sun got more intense because of climate change (maybe) but why didn’t you buy an umbrella or sun screen?
And become again a client state of the West, you forgot that part.
* Highly educated population.
* Remnant of an ancient non-Arab Islamic empire.
* Almost precisely the same population count.
And people don't starve in Turkey. Why would they starve in a Western-aligned Iran? The main problem in the richer half of the world is already obesity.
Just pick a random African country where the West helps.
And some African countries are, in fact, developing as well. I don't think that an average Kenyan starves either.
It's actually the US making the Iranian people starve on account of their (US's) economic war against Iran, and the same goes for Cuba and the Cubans living in Cuba. Saying that the Iranians should embrace with full arms the same Westerners that are making them starve right at this moment has to be a bit.
That matters if you live in a functioning democracy.
If you are being exploited and oppressed by your own ruling class rather than a foreign one it makes little difference. You might even be better off.
They pump over 4 Million barrels per day (https://ycharts.com/indicators/iran_crude_oil_production).
This equals about 1.7 Million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per day, which is an increase of 120% since year 2000 and corresponds to about 2% of the global CO2 emissions.
No nation on earth like Iran, save perhaps for China and Norway, is in such a unique position of power, both economically, socially, and with the engineering knowhow) and political ability to actually do something to prevent climate damage. Instead they are making the situation more difficult.
One will help in the mid-term and the other in the long-term.
https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/goddard/warming-...
In many cases governments are cutting back on spending on dealing with these sorts of problems because they can avoid blame by saying it is a result of climate change and few people ask why they did not act to mitigate the effects.