By Obi Anyadike
THE death and destruction that conflicts cause are visible and immediate tragedies, but often overlooked are the long-term environmental consequences of that violence – insidious, poisonous legacies.
Even before a shot is fired, standing armies are climate-hostile. Voraciously energy-hungry and wasteful, military establishments are believed to account for 5.5% of all global greenhouse gas emissions.
The globe-spanning US Armed Forces, with their fleets of ships, tanks, and high-performance aircraft, are the world’s largest institutional users of petrol. As a result, their carbon footprint is greater than most countries, bigger than Sweden, Denmark, or Portugal.
Then there are the logistics chains that keep militaries supplied to factor in and, if we are being thorough, the emissions of the arms manufacturing industry as well.
But it’s the devastation of war that supercharges environmental ruin.
Artillery fire and airstrikes uproot forests, fields, and tree lines; trenches and fortifications disturb natural habitats; people forced from their homes put new pressure on land resources; while the deliberate targeting of economic assets – from factories to refineries – pollutes air, soil, and water. Rebuilding what has been destroyed also incurs a climate toll.
Last year, there were at least 59 recorded armed conflicts – a record number. The following are snapshots of the environmental impact and potential long-term humanitarian consequences of just four examples of that violence.
Ukraine’s ‘ecocide’
The first 12 months of the war may have triggered a net increase of 120 million tonnes of greenhouse gases – equivalent to the annual output of Belgium. The environmental destruction has been so extensive it has been described as an “ecocide”, with the damage estimated to have cost more than $57 billion.
Attacks on factories, agro-industries, and water and sewage infrastructure have resulted in widespread pollution. Shelling, wildfires, deforestation, and chemical contamination have already affected around one third of Ukraine’s protected areas. The ecological damage compounds the toxic legacy of when Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union.
Two environmental crises stand out both in terms of scale and their potential long-term public health consequences.
The destruction in June 2022 of the Kakhova dam, Ukraine’s largest, is regarded as the worst environmental disaster in Europe since Chernobyl. The suspected Russian attack resulted in the draining of nearly 90% of the reservoir, and caused massive flooding that drowned thousands of hectares of land in what was the country’s southern breadbasket.
Irrigation has since ceased on 600,000 hectares of former farmland, and the region may rapidly be reverting to its previous semi-desert state.
In the same year, a missile strike on the Kremenchuk oil refinery started several substantial fires that released pollutants into the atmosphere. The densely populated city of Kremenchuk to the south was affected, although the prevailing wind blew much of the toxic smoke north, over rural areas. The emergency response may have also contributed to disaster, as the fire-retardant foams used contained “forever chemicals”.
Gaza – a war crime?
The UN environmental agency, UNEP, has described the ecological impact of Israel’s invasion of Gaza as “unprecedented”, and the damage to ecosystems and biodiversity as potentially irreversible.
Nearly half of all tree cover and farmland in Gaza has been destroyed, with orchards and olive groves systematically targeted. Israel’s military action has been so devastating it has been described as another ecocide, and there have been calls for it to be investigated as a potential war crime.
The Geneva conventions specifically forbid warring parties from using methods that cause “widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment”.
The fighting has generated 39 million tonnes of debris, contaminated with asbestos, industrial and medical waste, and other hazardous substances, according to a preliminary UNEP assessment. Munitions containing heavy metals and explosive chemicals have also been used in densely populated Gaza.
The shutdown of water treatment plants means sewage pollutes beaches, coastal waters, soil, and freshwater. Solid waste management has also ground to a halt. Some of the rubbish choking the city is being burnt as fuel by displaced families, with unknown health consequences. Surviving trees are also being chopped down and used for heating.
In just the first two months, the war may have generated a carbon footprint equivalent to burning at least 150,000 tonnes of coal, according to new research. The calculation includes the CO2 emissions from the making and the exploding of munitions, and cargo flights to Israel by US planes ferrying military supplies.
Ethiopia – green gains lost
A three-decade effort by the Ethiopian government to restore degraded land in the arid and drought-prone northern Tigray region was a success. But those green gains have been thrown into reverse by the two year-long Tigray war, which began in 2020.
Trees were chopped down for fuel by both desperate people made homeless by the conflict and the soldiers camped out in the countryside. The extent of the denuded forest cover is clearly visible by satellite. The region’s agricultural infrastructure – a strategic investment – was also destroyed, including irrigation equipment, seed nurseries, and research institutions.
People threatened by extreme hunger as a result of a government scorched-earth campaign and de facto aid blockade turned to the natural environment to try and earn an income or feed themselves – magnifying the environmental damage. Not even sacred land was spared.
Close to four million people are going hungry in Tigray, and a further 11 million in the rest of the country where other conflicts continue to simmer. With the government heavily in debt, and donor funding inadequate to meet those emergency needs, ecological recovery may well have to take a backseat to other priorities.
Myanmar – resource looting
Since Myanmar’s coup in 2021, there has been a surge in eco-looting – a consequence of weak environmental regulations and a cash-strapped government looking to sidestep financial sanctions.
Myanmar is incredibly resource-rich – from the biodiversity of its forests to the rare-earth elements buried deep in its mountains. The escalating civil war has been an opportunity for wealthy elites and armed groups to plunder. Environmental defenders, who pre-coup had been a brake on some of the worst excesses, have been targeted for murder and arrest by the military.
Alongside increased logging and jade mining has been a rise in gold prospecting in the country’s north, which involves both the military and the secessionist Kachin Independence Organisation. Trees have been cleared, land and riverbanks eroded, and waterways polluted with sediment and mercury.
The humanitarian consequence of this extractive war economy has been the displacement and violent persecution of vulnerable communities.
Edited by Andrew Gully.
–––––
The New Humanitarian puts quality, independent journalism at the service of the millions of people affected by humanitarian crises around the world. Find out more at www.thenewhumanitarian.org.
