Holly Hughes on the silent victim of armed conflict…
This year, we have witnessed unspeakable conflict ravage the world, from the ongoing invasion of Ukraine to the genocide in Gaza, the ensuing conflict in Lebanon and Iran, and Sudan’s brutal civil war. If the incessant bombardment of war feels all-encompassing, that’s because it is. Armed conflict numbers are at their highest since World War II, with one in seven people exposed to conflict this year, including a shocking 87 per cent of Palestinians.
The human toll of this violence is devastatingly vast. Yet, there is another, silent victim of the current destruction: the environment. The reality is that war doesn’t just destroy lives, livelihoods, and homelands; it also destroys the planet. Deforestation, poisoned soils, habitat loss, air pollution, landmines, contaminated water sources, the exorbitant carbon footprint of military vehicles running on petroleum fuels, artillery strikes, decreased biodiversity, torched crops – the environmental devastation wars wreak is extensive and often irrevocable.
In Ukraine, a land renowned for its fertile soils and abundant food production, landscape fires due to fighting had damaged an area equivalent to one million football pitches by February 2023. These fires, which occurred primarily in agricultural areas, killed wildlife and vegetation, disturbed ecosystems, increased soil erosion, and polluted water bodies.
Meanwhile, Russia’s demolition of Kakhovka – Ukraine’s largest dam – was decried by the EU as the worst environmental disaster in Europe since Chernobyl. It unleashed catastrophic floods, submerging thousands of hectares of land in contaminated water. Pets, livestock, and wildlife all perished, habitats were decimated, and tens of thousands of people were forcibly displaced as a tsunami of sewage rushed upon them. Ultimately, it was an act of ecocide: an event of violent environmental destruction caused by deliberate human action.
As it stands, Russia has committed ecocide in Ukraine to the tune of €52.4bn, according to the EU. While using the environment as a weapon of war bears immediate consequences for Ukrainians, it also creates a toxic legacy that will take decades, if not lifetimes, to overcome.
ARMED CONFLICT PUSHES HUMANITY EVEN CLOSER TO THE PRECIPICE OF CLIMATE CATASTROPHE …
The same is true of the situation in Gaza. Already vulnerable to climate change and struggling to support ecosystems in the face of rapid urbanisation, high population density, and ongoing conflict, Gaza is now on the precipice of irreversible environmental catastrophe. Almost half of all farmland and tree cover in Gaza had been destroyed by March of this year. Approximately 39 million tonnes of debris had been generated by June, with each tonne containing environmental hazards such as medical waste, asbestos, dust, and other toxic substances. Gaza’s five wastewater treatment plants have shut down, leaving sewage to contaminate beaches, soil, and freshwater with a host of toxins that pose myriad threats to the health of Gazans, marine life, and arable lands. Solid waste management systems are equally defunct. Five out of the six waste facilities have been damaged so that, by November last year, an estimated 1,200 tonnes of rubbish were accumulating daily around camps and shelters. One can only imagine what that number is now.
Additionally, cooking gas shortages have forced families to burn whatever is available to survive – plastic, waste, wood. This increases deforestation as well as raising significant concerns about air quality and pollution.
Speaking of pollution, the carbon emissions of war – and that of the Gazan invasion in particular – are astronomical. In the first two months of Israel’s offensive, the conflict produced more carbon emissions than the annual footprint of 20 of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations. To rebuild the 100,000 damaged buildings in Gaza will require 30 million tonnes of construction carbon emissions – that’s the annual carbon footprint of New Zealand. And these estimates, due to lack of available data, are conservative! Some studies suggest the true carbon impact of Israel’s genocide could be up to eight times higher.
Even without comprehensive data (reporting military emissions is voluntary, due in large part to pressure from the US), global militaries account for approximately five per cent of annual greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. That makes it the fourth largest carbon footprint in the world, after the USA, China, and India. The US Defense Department remains the world’s single largest consumer of oil, even after attempts to reduce its fossil fuel consumption.
This information is important because, as David Boyd, UN special rapporteur for human rights and the environment explains, “it helps us understand the immense magnitude of military emissions – from preparing for war, carrying out war, and rebuilding after war. Armed conflict pushes humanity even closer to the precipice of climate catastrophe, and is an idiotic way to spend our shrinking carbon budget.”
Particularly when we are still living with the polluting legacies of previous wars. From the first world war up until the 1970s, expired munitions and chemical weapons were routinely dumped near Beaufort’s Dyke in the Irish Sea. Most of these armaments remain buried on the sea floor between Northern Ireland and Scotland today, while others have detonated underwater or washed up on beaches.
On shore, landmines and explosive weapons litter landscapes long after fighting has ceased, continuing to wreak havoc on the natural environment as well as local populations. The potential damage of these armaments is only heightened by global warming. In Greenland, for example, it is feared that melting ice will cause toxic remnants from military equipment abandoned by the US during the Cold War to enter waterways.
In the Middle East, rising temperatures are causing unexploded bombs and large ammunition dumps to detonate. Intense heatwaves were responsible for detonating six arms depots in Iraq between 2018 and 2019, while similar extreme temperatures caused a munitions dump explosion in Jordan in 2020.
In Africa, significant biodiversity loss caused by conflicts that occurred between 1946 and 2010, is still being keenly felt. Furthermore, worsening climate impacts hamper attempts to recover from conflict, as polluted resources, poor soil conditions, and extreme temperatures cripple recovering populations’ attempts to rebuild.
The hardship caused by this environmental degradation has been shown to incite further conflict. The ongoing war in Sudan’s Darfur region – considered to be the world’s first climate change war – is proof of this. Drought, desertification, scarcity of natural resources has intensified the conflict in Sudan, and will continue to do so worldwide. In fact, research has shown that increasing temperatures similarly increase the risk of armed struggles, particularly in regions where populations are already divided.
In short, the environment is not just a victim of war – it is an instigator, a hostage, and sometimes even a weapon. As we continue to advocate for peace in a conflict-riven world, let us advocate too for the silent suffering of our planet. Climate action is inextricably tied to social justice – there can’t be one without the other. Thus, let this knowledge of the environmental cost of war invigorate our civic responsibility to demand justice where we can, advocate for liberation when we can, and remain united in the hope of a fairer, safer world that will protect us because we protect it.