In all cycles of wars, the environment has been so far left behind, turning into a silent victim of armed conflicts, from polluted water and contaminated land to deforestation and poisoned air. It is clear that ecological consequences of war will have a serious negative impact on local population both in the short and in the long term, and that it is also important to act as soon as possible to allow the environment to “heal” faster, as it can take up to decades of recovery. Yet, post-conflict recovery efforts have historically prioritized political stability, economic reconstruction, and humanitarian aid while largely overlooking environmental restoration.
Environmental degradation and natural resources exploitation can therefore be implicated in all phases of the conflict, from contributing to the outbreak, from undermining the peace processes, and this is why it is fundamental to include environmental key elements when understanding the roots of a conflict and how to reach peace. Particularly because in the aftermath of a war, natural resources such as land, water, gas, or minerals, are the primary, if not the solely, assets that a government can count on to avoid a total economic collapse. How those resources are used and shared can alter the course of peacebuilding.
However, not always government can count on its national natural resources if they have been targeted by violent conflicts: when agricultural land is contaminated, fisheries are depleted, and forests are destroyed, communities struggle to rebuild their livelihoods. And resource scarcity and competition over arable land, water, and minerals can rise tensions and eventually trigger renewed conflict. Not to consider the health risks that derive from post-conflict environmental degradation, such as from contaminated water and toxic land. For example, the Vietnam War’s use of Agent Orange left a toxic legacy in the environmental as a whole that continues to impact ecosystems and human health decades after.
Similarly, it is possible to fully understand the environmental consequences of war by looking at Afghanistan, and how necessary it is necessary to start implementing green sustainable projects and nature-based solutions in the post-conflict recovery. Putting aside the huge quantities of greenhouse gas emissions and the consequential contamination of the atmosphere, disastrous consequences have come, for example, from the destruction of industrial infrastructures which led to the release of toxic chemicals in hydrological and land resources. Or from the use of explosive ammunitions that contains polluting agents able to contaminate the land of decades. Afghanistan agrarian land and irrigation system are therefore severely damaged, not to consider that during the war, illegal deforestation has taken away almost two thirds of forests, causing desertification and loss of ecosystems. To reach a sustainable peace, and to ensure food security, and economic recovery, it is fundamental to prioritize the environment.
Colombia provides a compelling example of how environmental peacebuilding can aid post-conflict recovery. After decades of armed conflict between the government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), deforestation, illegal mining, and land grabs of arable territories fuelled new tensions. The 2016 peace agreement included provisions for sustainable rural development, reforestation programs, and ecotourism initiatives to help former combatants reintegrate into society. Colombia’s approach to post-conflict recovery demonstrates how environmental efforts can support peacebuilding, create economic opportunities, and reduce the risk of renewed violence, as it consolidates social reintegration.
In conclusion, conflict pollution, land degradation, over-exploitation of natural resources, and weak environmental governance have direct and long-term consequences for communities and directly impact climate-resilience capacities. If sustainable peace is to be achieved, environmental recovery must be a central pillar of post-conflict rebuilding efforts, as it can guarantee a boost to economy, food security, a major resilience to climate-induced disasters and can increase social collaboration, diminishing the risk of a conflict relapse.
By The European Institute for International Relations
