Smoke rises after an Israeli airstrike hits a building near the airport road in Beirut, Lebanon, Tuesday, March 31, 2026. (AP)
The war in the Persian Gulf region between the US-Israel axis and Iran makes it impossible to ignore the uncomfortable truth: war is a climate crime.
Researchers have found that the emissions from the first two weeks of this conflict alone have measurably depleted the shared global carbon budget, harming every nation on Earth.
The single biggest contributor is not from the immediate flames of combat but from the aftermath: clearing rubble and rebuilding. Rubble management and post-destruction rebuilding are significant yet often overlooked contributors to climate change. Their primary impact comes from fuelling the high-emissions construction sector.
First responders and volunteers emerge through the smoke at the site of an Israeli airstrike that struck an apartment building in Beirut, Lebanon, Wednesday, April 8, 2026. (AP)
When buildings are destroyed—whether by natural disasters or armed conflict—the resulting debris requires energy-intensive disposal, while subsequent reconstruction releases large amounts of embodied carbon, mainly through cement and steel production.
This means the climate cost of war extends far beyond the ceasefire, locking in emissions for years through reconstruction. This is a crucial point for any post-war reconstruction planning: would it have to be green? For instance, what is going to be the reconstruction strategy in Gaza, which already returned to a pre-industrial “Stone Age” existence, in the aftermath of destruction due to unrestrained, intense bombardment?
Deliberately bombing oil storage facilities and refineries does not just disrupt energy supply; it releases vast quantities of unburned fossil fuels directly into the atmosphere, alongside the CO₂ from the fires themselves. This tactic has a double climate penalty. Experts tell us that these combustion processes release not only conventional pollutants—including fine particulate matter (PM₂.₅) and sulfur dioxide (SO₂)—but also toxic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and other hazardous by-products.
Exposure to these pollutants is known to elevate the risk of acute respiratory and cardiovascular health effects. Vulnerable populations—including infants, older adults, and individuals with pre-existing conditions such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)—face the greatest health burden.
Carbon emissions for first 14 days of Iran war (Data Source: Climate & Community Institute)
Standard national emissions inventories often exclude military emissions. This analysis reveals that if the emissions continued at the same rate as it happened during the first two weeks of conflict, it could produce emissions exceeding the annual totals of about 84 sovereign nations. If global military emissions were consistently accounted for, they would represent a significant percentage of the world’s remaining carbon budget.
Smoke rises following several Israeli airstrikes in Beirut, Lebanon, Wednesday, April 8, 2026. (AP)
The emissions from manufacturing replacement weapons (jets, ships, missiles) are often invisible in real-time reporting. By including these, the analysis correctly captures the full life-cycle climate impact of the war, not just the operational phase.
The Larger Ethical and Political Implications
The Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C and 2°C targets are predicated on a remaining “carbon budget”—the total amount of CO₂ we can still emit. Wars, by their nature, are discretionary emissions. Every ton released by conflict is a ton that cannot be released by essential activities like food production or basic transportation, pushing the world closer to irreversible climate tipping points.
The poorest nations, which have contributed the least to historical emissions, are often the most vulnerable to climate impacts. This analysis shows that the emissions from two weeks of war between major powers exceed the entire annual emissions of 84 low-emitting countries. The climate debt owed by warring nations to the global south is immense and unacknowledged.
Climate costs are rarely on the table during ceasefires or peace talks. This analysis argues that they should be—as part of reparations, reconstruction mandates, and accountability frameworks.
An excavator removes rubble after a strike in Tehran, Iran, Tuesday, April 7, 2026. (AP)
What a Climate-Responsible Response Would Look Like
As the world struggles to accelerate decarbonization, the continued investment in and execution of high-intensity warfare represents a profound and self-defeating contradiction. Instead of doubling down on fossil fuels, the shock from a Hormuz blockade could be used to accelerate the transition to renewables, which are inherently more secure because solar, wind, and hydro power cannot be blockaded by a foreign power. Further, distributed generation (rooftop solar, local batteries) is far more resilient to supply shocks than centralised fossil fuel systems.
But as the researchers note, the political reflex is almost always toward more drilling, not more solar panels. The war’s aftershock, therefore, is not just an economic or geopolitical problem—it is a climate problem of the highest order. The difference today is that we have a rapidly closing carbon budget. A similar “energy security first” response in 2026 would be catastrophic for climate goals.
A ship near Strait of Hormuz | File photo (AFP)
But as the researchers note, the political reflex is almost always toward more drilling, not more solar panels. President Trump’s “Drill Baby Drill” policy can only result in increased climate risks and slow down the clean energy transition, or even cause an economic backlash. The war’s aftershock, therefore, is not just an economic or geopolitical problem—it is a climate problem of the highest order.
The fighting itself is a tragedy. But the real climate disaster will unfold in the months and years after the ceasefire, in the form of policy decisions driven by fear and short-term thinking. If nations use the war as justification to abandon climate action in the name of “energy security,” the emissions from the next decade will dwarf those from the battlefield. This is the hidden, unaccounted cost of war—one that will be paid by every nation on Earth, through a hotter, more unstable climate.
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of ETV Bharat)
Read More:
Interview | Noted Author Arshin Adib-Moghaddam On Iran War, AI Warfare And The Changing Global OrderWill Iran Talk? War, Oil And The Quiet Winners Of The Conflict