The environmental fallout from warfare is often overlooked amid the chaos of conflict.
The impacts of war begin long before, and last long after, the actual conflict itself. As is the case with all warfare, not many pay attention to the consequences that often extend far beyond the battlefield, particularly those impacting the greater environment, ecology, and economy. The ongoing conflict between Hezbollah and Israel underscores this broader truth. Whereas the immediate military and human toll of such conflicts captures global attention, peeling back the layers reveals a more subtle, yet dangerous set of ramifications that will challenge stability and recovery in the region for decades. This article examines the long-term environmental degradation and infrastructure destruction wrought by conflict, particularly in southern Lebanon and northern Israel, while also exploring how these factors intersect with both political and economic dynamics.
Environmental Impacts: A Slow-Burning Catastrophe
The environmental fallout from warfare is often overlooked amid the chaos of conflict. However, the damage inflicted upon ecosystems by military actions can lead to disastrous long-term consequences. Deforestation and soil erosion are the most cited environmental impacts of warfare. Yet in the case of the ongoing conflict between Hezbollah and Israel, this environmental degradation manifests in a variety of ways, affecting both countries significantly, including disastrous effects from CO2 emissions and pollution.
Rocket attacks and military operations have led to widespread destruction of vital ecosystems in northern Israel and southern Lebanon. Hezbollah’s rocket strikes frequently ignite fires in dry, forested areas, which threaten geodiversity, biodiversity, wildlife, and even agricultural productivity. Leftover debris and rubble cause both air and soil pollution. The Galilee and Golan regions of northern Israel, known for their fertile lands, play a critical role in maintaining local ecosystems and providing water essential for agriculture. At times, in those areas alone as much as 1000 hectares (or 2471 acres) have burned per week, leading to 115 square km in Lebanon and 150 square km in Isreal burnt as of August 2024. There are additional particular risks and effects as these conflicts intensify, resulting in fires, fumes, and destruction that could irreparably harm these natural resources, severely impacting food security and biodiversity.
Moreover, the smoke produced by these fires worsens air quality, creating health risks for local populations and contributing to broader environmental stress. Increased carbon emissions from fires exacerbate existing climate challenges in a region already grappling with water scarcity. Conflict leads to increased rates of waste dumping and burning, improper management and less waste segregation adds to worsened air, water, and soil quality. This stress on the environment not only threatens agricultural outputs but also disrupts local water cycles, ultimately jeopardizing long-term sustainability in both Lebanon and northern Israel, as it will take a minimum of 10 years for natural regeneration and up to 40 years for reforestation.
On the Lebanese side, the impact of conflict is more insidious but equally damaging. Hezbollah’s military operations, particularly those involving artillery, have led to significant destruction of southern Lebanon’s agricultural zones. Many conventional weapons have toxic constituents, so many of the explosives involved contaminate the soil and degrade sources of water, further diminishing an already fragile agricultural base. Land mines, cluster munitions, and other explosive remnants can restrict access to agricultural land and foul soils and water resources with metals and toxic materials.
In addition to direct agricultural impacts, military engagements often lead to the destruction of infrastructure essential for environmental management, such as water treatment facilities. And they do not have to be destroyed to have detrimental impact; workers hurt or killed, or simply moving out of harm’s way, can shut down treatment plants and pumping systems. Inadvertently damaged or disrupted facilities are just as bad as deliberate attacks. In all, these impacts not only compromise public health but also worsen existing water shortages, a long-standing issue of significance for both Lebanon and Israel. As these conflicts unfold, the long-term ecological consequences pose a persistent threat to recovery efforts, making it increasingly difficult for communities to rebuild.
Infrastructure Destruction: Weakening Foundations
One of the most significant consequences of the ongoing conflict is the destruction of critical infrastructure along the Lebanese-Israeli border. More than 60% of border communities in Lebanon, and more than 1000 buildings directly near the border in Israel, have faced extensive damage or complete destruction, often compared to that of an earthquake.
Hezbollah’s military facilities, frequently situated near civilian infrastructure and often conducted from within civilian areas, create a situation where retaliatory strikes by Israel often lead to collateral damage. Essential services—power grids, telecommunications, and transportation networks—are frequently targeted or inadvertently affected. This is nothing new; throughout history belligerents have targeted or unintentionally affected essential services, leaving burnt crops, dammed rivers, and poisoned water supplies. Both sides have so far stopped short of all-out war, but satellite photos, radar imagery, and records of military activity show that near daily attacks have left communities in both Israel and Lebanon devastated.
Over the last 30 years, reports indicate that Lebanese electric companies have accumulated an average debt of $1.5 billion annually. Lebanon’s electric grid, after failing in April, is barely operational today, with many regions receiving only limited power. In areas riddled with collapse, the loss of functioning infrastructure exacerbates public dissatisfaction and further complicates recovery efforts to move fuel to power the grid and move people to work the grid. The destruction of roads and bridges also hampers humanitarian aid delivery and isolates communities from access to essential services, including healthcare and education.
The combination of military operations and the resulting infrastructural destruction creates a vicious cycle: as infrastructure deteriorates, public services suffer, which in turn fuels further unrest and discontent.
Israeli use of bulldozers and armored vehicles to level buildings has displaced entire communities, with thousands of buildings and large bands of land damaged along both sides’ borders. Exploding tunnels to destroy underground earthen works, depots, and bunkers is one of the more insidious examples of infrastructure devastation, as adjacent foundations become compromised and water tables are potentially poisoned. Lebanon will certainly face substantial challenges in rebuilding its infrastructure above and below ground, whereas Israel has a broader base of international support. Corruption and political gridlock on both sides will further hinder reconstruction efforts, leaving communities vulnerable and increasingly reliant on external aid, which is often inconsistent and insufficient.
The combination of military operations and the resulting infrastructure destruction creates a vicious cycle: as infrastructure deteriorates, public services suffer, which in turn fuels further unrest and discontent. Research indicates that restoration efforts tend to be limited after war-driven landscape impacts. Without functioning roads, reliable electricity, or access to clean water, citizens’ prospects for recovery will be bleak, resulting in a future characterized by prolonged instability.
Political and Economic Struggles: The Battles Within
Whereas Hezbollah’s military actions against Israel capture significant media attention, it remains a political party with elected officials in the Lebanese government. As such, the group has grappled with both internal and external challenges that complicate its relevance as a political player. Such tension is not only rooted in both historical and military contexts but also in the socio-economic realities facing Lebanon as a whole. Lebanon has had a protracted economic crisis since 2019. This economic crisis, marked by soaring inflation and a collapsing public sector, severely limits the country’s capacity to restore essential services, much less damaged facilities.
Hezbollah has historically positioned itself as the “defender of Lebanon against Israeli aggression,” but its military actions increasingly draw criticism from Lebanese citizens who feel the group prioritizes its regional ambitions and connections to Iran over pressing domestic issues. The destruction of essential services aggravates public discontent, continuing a cycle of instability that undermines any prospects for recovery.
As many Lebanese count on agriculture for their livelihoods, the deterioration of arable land complicates an already dire economic situation. Farmers can submit damage claims, but like all war damage, until they receive compensation, cash flows reduce to a trickle. South Lebanon grows 22 percent of the country’s fruit and citrus and 38 percent of the country’s olives. With much of that land destroyed, harvesters and farmers not only have to halt their production and stunt their livelihood, but they cannot in turn reinvest in the Lebanese economy.
On both sides of the border agriculture is considered informal work: over 75 percent of workers in this sector are not registered to receive state-sponsored funds and benefits, meaning that they have no health care, insurance, or even social security.
Since the country’s inception, Israel has been at odds with those at its borders. Israel’s ability to balance its regional defense with its domestic responsibilities will continually be under scrutiny, routinely shaping and reshaping its military calculus and long-term strategy. In certain reports, Israeli actions, particularly in using white phosphorous bombs, are even seen as deliberate attacks on Lebanon’s environment and economy. Combined with the already touchy sentiment involving Israel and other Arab States, reports of these so-called deliberate attacks on Lebanese only exacerbate long standing challenges politically.
Finally, more and more countries are asking other nations to pay for the ecological impact of war on their economies through reparations. Both countries may ask the other to pay reparations, which in the case of both sides becomes an impossible financial matter. Whether directly and indirectly, any money, either received from or paid to both sides, could involve Iranian sources. In this particularly complex case, compensation is likely to be a non-starter.
Final Thoughts: Long-Term Ramifications for Lebanon and Israel
Little has been written about the environmental impacts of war, but nature too is a casualty. Interestingly, reporting on the war in Ukraine has addressed the war’s effects on the global climate, but almost nothing is written about the Hezbollah-Israeli conflict. The consequences of both Israeli and Hezbollah’s actions extend far beyond immediate military outcomes, encompassing deep environmental and infrastructural damage with lasting implications. The environmental ruin of northern Israel and southern Lebanon threatens food security, water resources, and biodiversity, complicating recovery efforts long after the cessation of hostilities. As this land has long been contested, there is a clear need to understand the negative effects of combat on an environment that undoubtedly will remain a point of contention in the future.
As the conflict persists, the long-term ramifications for both Lebanon and Israel will become increasingly evident, shaping the future stability of the Middle East. This is on top of two decades of war in the region that already have far reaching environmental costs. The destruction of infrastructure and environmental degradation may never dominate the headlines, but their lingering effects will complicate recovery and threaten regional stability for decades to come. In the end, war destroys. Ultimately, damages from conflict depend on the various types of weaponry employed, the severity of the hostility, the terrain, and even the fighting tactics. Attention to environmental issues in the face of many competing social and economic priorities is usually limited, but it is essential to understand that conflict is not merely a military struggle. It is a profound battle for the future of the region’s environment, economy, and political landscape, with consequences that will reverberate far beyond the present.
Chaveso “Chevy” Cook, Ph.D. is an active-duty Army lieutenant colonel, a retired Lieutenant General Dubik Writing Fellow, and is a veteran of overseas operations in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Tajikistan, Niger, and the United Arab Emirates. Currently serving as a Division Chief on the Joint Staff (J39), Chevy served in Battalion Command at Fort Meade, MD. He also previously worked as the speechwriter for Army Secretary Christine Wormuth and as an instructor at West Point. Lastly, he is the co-founder and Executive Director of the non-profit MilitaryMentors.org.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, the U.S. Army, or the Department of Defense.
Photo Description: This dramatic image of black smoke plumes over Baghdad, Iraq, was acquired the morning of March 31, 2003, by the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) instrument. The plumes, which originate along major roads and canals, are believed to be burning pools of oil from pipelines.
Photo Credit: Courtesy of NASA via the Terra satellite.