Gonna copy and paste the real question and answer here since the title of the article is a bit misleading:

IGN: "[Battlefield 2042] is talking about de-patriated people, we're talking about citizens who've been displaced by climate change and war. Is there any sort of sensitivity towards those issues for you guys? Is there any social commentary anywhere with what you're trying to do? Or is this purely just a multiplayer game?"

Berlin: "It is definitely purely a multiplayer game for us. The reason we decided to go down this route is so we could create a narrative with this world that we could create through the eyes of the No-Pats. [The in-universe term for the refugee warriors.] We wanted to get more spectacle in there, and more massive events happening. The setting fits that perfectly. It fits that scale, and it gives us reasons to go all over the world. [...] It's for gameplay reasons across the board."

It's more that they didn't really choose the setting for the explicit purpose of making a political statement but instead chose it because it is suitable for the game (and like, honestly, if you want a war game set in the near future, what the fuck else is it going to be about?).

Anyone ready for g*mers to explain how women actually didn't exist until 2050?