Scorched Earth: The Environmental Toll of Modern Warfare

Oliver Hovenden | Climate and Environment Fellow

Image sourced from Sayedqudrathashimy1991 via Wikimedia Commons under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

As world leaders gathered at COP29 last November, the Ukrainian delegation marked 1000 days since the full-scale Russian invasion of their country. Their message was clear: the environmental toll of conflict can no longer be ignored. War devastates forests, rivers, farmland, and air, yet these impacts rarely make headlines.

While governments pledge to cut emissions, many simultaneously fund or ignore conflicts that obliterate ecosystems and accelerate climate breakdown. This isn’t just hypocrisy – it directly undermines global efforts to avert ecological collapse.

From Ukraine to Gaza: the environmental toll

There are currently at least 110 active armed conflicts raging worldwide. Although international humanitarian law offers protections for nature, the natural world remains, as Greenpeace puts it, a ‘silent casualty of war.' Legal safeguards are routinely ignored, often under the pretext of ‘military necessity.’

Few conflicts demonstrate an environmental toll more starkly than the war in Ukraine. Since Russia’s 2022 invasion, Ukraine’s ecosystems have been scarred by craters, pollution, and fire. The destruction of the Kakhovka Dam, labelled by the European Union as an act of ecocide, unleashed a toxic flood across southern Ukraine, contaminating water systems, killing wildlife and livestock, and releasing 150 tonnes of toxic industrial waste, alongside sewage, pesticides, and dislodged landmines into the Black Sea.

Ukraine’s estimated environmental damage totals AUD$110 billion. However, the cost cannot be viewed as purely economic, with entire ecosystems and species being lost. The scale of the destruction has caused Ukraine to pursue 247 environmental war crimes cases in both domestic and international courts. Fourteen of these are classified as ecocide under the country’s criminal code.

Meanwhile, the conflict in Gaza is also having a devastating impact on the environment. David Boyd, the United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur for Human Rights and Environment, has called Israel’s military operations in Gaza ‘disastrous’ for the climate and environment, with mass air, water, and soil pollution ‘exposing Palestinians to a wide range of toxic substances.’ Since Israel’s bombardment in late 2023, over 85 per cent of Gaza’s water and sanitation systems have been destroyed. Over 100 million litres of raw sewage now pour into the Mediterranean daily, threatening long-term environmental damage through groundwater contamination. UN field assessments have also detected hazardous air levels of chemicals like sulphur dioxide and asbestos caused by bombed residential and industrial sites.

In both Ukraine and Gaza, we see how modern warfare turns entire ecosystems into battlefields, with devastating consequences for both people and the environment.

A Climate Catastrophe

Conflict does not just destroy ecosystems; it is also accelerating climate change. As David Boyd notes: ‘armed conflict pushes humanity even closer to the precipice of climate catastrophe.’ Researchers estimate the military campaign in Gaza released over 536,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide in its first 120 days, more than the annual carbon footprint of 20 of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations. In Ukraine, the government claims over three million hectares of forest have been destroyed and approximately 180 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emitted, due to shelling, wildfires, and industrial destruction.

War also dismantles climate resilience systems like solar panels, farmland, and clean water, and necessitates carbon-intensive rebuilding. The reconstruction effort of Gaza’s 100,000 damaged buildings could generate at least 30 million tonnes of carbon – more than the annual carbon emissions of 135 countries. Conflict doesn't just contribute to climate breakdown; it compounds its deadliest impacts.

A Vicious Cycle

Just as war can drive environmental devastation, so too can environmental devastation drive war. Climate change acts as a threat multiplier, worsening already fragile living standards, driving political instability, and mass displacement as food security collapses, diseases spread, and clean water becomes scarce. Unlike conventional security threats, climate change can create multiple, simultaneous global crises, eroding governance structures and fuelling conflict, extremism, and authoritarianism.

This cycle is already evident. In Syria, a prolonged drought from 2006 to 2010 devastated agriculture and displaced over a million rural residents, pushing them into overcrowded cities and contributing to the conditions that ignited the 2011 uprising. Such crises demonstrate a dangerous feedback loop, with climate change and ecological breakdown fuelling instability, and instability, in turn, accelerating environmental degradation.

The Key Battleground

If the world is serious about addressing the climate crisis, it must confront one of its most destructive accelerants: war. As Benjamin Neimark of the University of London notes, ‘the military’s environmental exceptionalism allows them to pollute with impunity, as if the carbon emissions spitting from their tanks and fighter jets don’t count.’ Environmental destruction can no longer be seen as justified collateral – it must be acknowledged as central to how modern conflicts are fought and endured.

To address this, the International Law Commission adopted the Draft Principles on the Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts in 2022. These non-binding guidelines clarify states’ responsibilities before, during, and after conflict.  Yet without enforcement mechanisms, these guidelines remain symbolic. Such principles must be embedded in international humanitarian law and backed by accountability mechanisms that deter violations.

Equally essential is recognising ecocide as a standalone international crime. Just as genocide acknowledges the destruction of a people, ecocide would address the widescale, deliberate destruction of ecosystems. States must confront the reality that by enabling armed conflicts, they are actively driving climate breakdown. No government can credibly claim to be fighting for a sustainable future while enabling wars that dismantle its foundations.

Conflict and climate breakdown are deeply intertwined. Until this cycle is broken, the climate crisis will remain a conflict we are destined to lose.

Oliver Hovenden is the Climate and Environment Fellow for Young Australians in International Affairs. He holds a Bachelor of Arts and Laws (Honours) from the University of Tasmania, majoring in Politics and International Relations. As Climate and Environment Fellow, Oliver is excited to use an environmental justice lens to explore the latest international developments in climate law and policy, the impact of climate activism, and Australia’s important role in the Antarctic and Indo-Pacific regions.