The Environmental Impact of War

Did you know that militaries are responsible for 5.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions?^[1]

Wars and conflicts not only have a devastating impact on people’s lives, but also negatively affect the environment and contribute significantly to climate change. The climate cost of the first two years of Russia’s war on Ukraine was greater than the annual greenhouse gas emissions generated individually by 175 countries. In Gaza, Israel’s destruction of ecosystems is being referred to as ecocide and a war crime. As conflicts continue to escalate, the environmental toll remains an underreported but critical dimension of warfare that demands global attention and action.

The direct destruction of ecosystems and habitats occurs on an immense scale during armed conflicts. In Ukraine, fires from military activities in the southern region can be seen from space. These fires not only destroy vegetation and decimate habitats but also release substantial amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere, further exacerbating climate change.

One of the most visible and immediate impacts of war on the environment is habitat destruction. Military operations, including the movement of heavy vehicles and the use of explosive weapons, can devastate landscapes, forests, and wildlife habitats, as well as the transportation of massive war machines and weapons around our planet, further increasing our greenhouse emissions. Even in Israel and Palestine during just this summer alone, the conflict has led to 20,000 acres of agricultural land being set ablaze, meanwhile displacing 100,000^[2]people, leading to a food shortage, and releasing hundreds of thousands of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

War often leads to severe water pollution. The destruction of infrastructure, such as water treatment plants and sewage systems, can result in the contamination of water sources. In Yemen, the ongoing conflict has severely impacted water resources, with dwindling supplies and deteriorating quality posing significant environmental and health challenges. Chemical spills from damaged industrial facilities and the use of certain weapons can introduce toxic substances into water bodies, affecting both human populations and their water supply, and potentially killing millions of aquatic animals. Take the 1991 Gulf War for an example: it was labelled as the ‘worst environmental disaster of our time’^[3]. Over 700 oil wells were ignited, burning an equivalent of 6 million barrels of oil a day for 10 months straight. Damaged oil wells spewed, forming oil lakes of over 50 square kilometres. However the worst of all was 11 million barrels of crude oil being spilled into the Persian Gulf, killing the marine life, and severely harming the ecosystem. This made the water unsafe for humans to swim in and stopped them from sourcing potable water from it.

The environmental impact of war doesn’t end with the conflict. Unexploded ordnance, landmines, and other toxic remnants of war can contaminate soil and water, and have the potential to cause acid rain for decades after a conflict ends. The effects of chemical deforestation techniques used during the Vietnam war, which ended 50 years ago, are still evident today; the once pristine habitats are now reduced to an almost apocalyptic state, purely for the gain of resources. These remnants not only pose immediate dangers to human life but also prevent the safe use of land for agriculture or development, leading to long-term environmental and economic challenges.

The massive carbon footprint of military operations significantly contributes to climate change. From the fuel consumed by military vehicles to the emissions from the manufacturing and testing of weapons, the military sector is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. The greenhouse gas emissions spent on transportation of weapons and supplies to the battlefield is estimated to be around one third^[4] of the total greenhouse gas emissions from the military. The destruction of carbon sinks like forests during conflicts further exacerbates this problem. Even in World War One, the destruction of soil for trenches as well as the deforestation would release millions of tons of stored CO2 into the atmosphere.

War can lead to dramatic losses in biodiversity. The destruction of habitats, coupled with increased poaching and illegal resource extraction during times of conflict, can push endangered species closer to extinction. In some cases (e.g. Vietnam is still struggling to reforest after the war), the environmental damage caused by war can be so severe that entire ecosystems may never fully recover.

There is a growing recognition of the need to protect the environment during armed conflicts. The International Law Commission has been working on draft principles to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. These principles aim to address issues such as the designation of protected zones and post-conflict environmental assessments and remediation. The United Nations and other international organizations are emphasising the effect on making peacekeeping operations more environmentally friendly. This includes efforts to reduce the carbon footprint of peacekeeping missions and to incorporate environmental considerations into post-conflict reconstruction efforts.

With all of this in mind, the value of peace remains deeply underestimated. If nations were not so fixated on outcompeting one another—resorting to mass violence and destruction just to claim parts of the planet as “theirs”—imagine how much further humanity could have progressed. There wouldn’t be reliance on polluting our planet, the mass deforestation, or senseless bloodshed. Instead, we could work together to protect and nurture our planet. However, many global leaders have become too fixated on their own countries rather than looking at the bigger picture, and the general public tends to turn a blind eye to the problem, leading to minimal progress being made as a whole.

But we are on a good trajectory. Environmental peacebuilding is a new approach that combines solving environmental problems with efforts to resolve conflicts and build peace. The idea is that working together on environmental issues can help conflicting groups build trust and find common ground.

The environmental impact of war is far-reaching and long-lasting. From immediate destruction of habitats to long-term consequences for climate change and biodiversity, armed conflicts pose a significant threat to our planet’s ecosystems. As we continue to grapple with global environmental challenges, it is crucial that we recognise and address the role that war plays in exacerbating these issues. The ongoing war in Ukraine has resulted in widespread environmental damage, with over $56.4 billion^[5] in estimated costs to the environment alone. But through the combination of environmental protection with conflict prevention, along with resolution and post-conflict reconstruction efforts, we can work towards a more peaceful and sustainable future for both humanity and our planet.

(Visited 16 times, 1 visits today)