As conflicts rage across Ukraine, Gaza, and parts of Africa, global attention remains fixed on political and humanitarian crises. Yet, an often-ignored casualty of these wars is the planet itself. Modern warfare is no longer limited to borders or armies; it is a weapon against ecosystems, air, and water — accelerating the climate crisis in ways that are only now being understood.
Planet under fire
The environmental toll of war is immense. According to the Conflict and Environment Observatory (CEOBS), the first 18 months of the Russia–Ukraine conflict produced an estimated 175 million tonnes of CO₂-equivalent emissions — comparable to the Netherlands’ annual carbon output. The destruction of fuel depots, industrial plants, and energy infrastructure triggered long-term pollution of air, soil, and rivers. As CEOBS experts observed in 2023, “the invisible damage of war outlives the fighting — ecosystems cannot rebuild as fast as cities.”
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) reported in 2022 that almost 80 per cent of major armed conflicts since 1950 have occurred in biodiversity hotspots. Forests are burned for military operations, wetlands drained for defense, and wildlife habitats fragmented by explosives. UNEP scientists describe this as “climate acceleration by conflict,” as wars dismantle the very natural systems that regulate carbon and stabilize global temperatures.
In the Middle East, oil fires from bombed refineries have turned fertile land into toxic wastelands. In Gaza, debris from collapsed infrastructure — laced with asbestos, lead, and microplastics — poses a lingering threat to marine and human health. From Syria to Sudan, the scars of war stretch far beyond borders, blurring the line between political violence and environmental collapse.
India’s environmental dilemma
Though not directly involved in these conflicts, India faces their environmental and economic repercussions. Disrupted energy and fertiliser supply chains have altered India’s sustainability trajectory. The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) reported that India’s coal use increased by 8 per cent in 2023, as the global energy market reeled from the Ukraine crisis. This surge temporarily slowed India’s transition toward renewable energy, complicating its goal of achieving 500 GW of non-fossil capacity by 2030.
Meanwhile, the fertiliser crisis — driven by reduced exports from Russia and Belarus — has affected Indian agriculture. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) observed that rising input costs have forced many farmers to reduce fertiliser use, affecting soil health and yields. This situation highlights a critical vulnerability for India: its dependence on global trade for energy and agriculture makes it environmentally exposed to faraway conflicts.
From a researcher’s perspective, this dependency underscores a paradox at the heart of India’s development model — the need to pursue industrial growth for economic security while upholding global climate commitments. India’s balancing act reveals that sustainability is not just an environmental issue but a geopolitical one.
Environmental diplomacy in a fractured world
Amid this global turbulence, India has emerged as a strong voice for what could be called “environmental peacekeeping.” During its G20 Presidency in 2023, India introduced the Green Development Pact, a policy framework connecting post-pandemic recovery with climate resilience. The Pact reflects a subtle but significant shift in India’s foreign policy — positioning environmental security as a pillar of diplomacy.
Through the International Solar Alliance (ISA), co-founded with France, India is championing solar energy as an equaliser for the Global South. The ISA now unites over 120 nations in promoting renewable access, especially across Africa and Asia. This initiative is less about technology and more about ethics — using sustainable energy to replace dependency and conflict with cooperation.
Equally transformative is India’s Mission LiFE (Lifestyle for Environment), launched in partnership with UNEP. This initiative promotes small, cumulative behavioural changes as drivers of climate action — from reducing waste to adopting sustainable consumption patterns. As India’s Ministry of External Affairs noted, “climate responsibility must evolve from regulation to culture.”
In my view, these steps represent a deeper philosophical turn: a recognition that environmental stewardship is not a policy domain, but a civilizational responsibility. India’s approach blends scientific realism with moral vision, presenting sustainability as both survival strategy and soft power.
Climate accountability and defence
Despite such progress, contradictions remain. India’s 2024-25 defense budget saw an eight per cent rise, reflecting legitimate national security concerns. Yet, like most nations, India does not count military emissions in its climate reporting. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates that global military operations account for 5-6 per cent of total greenhouse gas emissions — yet remain exempt from international disclosure.
This omission exposes a significant gap in global climate governance. “The very institutions designed to protect humanity are contributing to planetary insecurity,” SIPRI analysts stated in 2024. For India, which seeks to lead in climate diplomacy, addressing this blind spot is vital. Integrating green defence practices — such as biofuels for the armed forces, solar-powered bases, and climate risk assessments in border zones — could align security strategy with sustainability.
As a researcher, I believe that redefining security through an environmental lens will become essential in the 21st century. The defence of borders must coexist with the defence of biospheres.
Peace as climate policy
Wars do not only destroy; they also distract. Every conflict diverts funding, focus, and cooperation away from climate action. The Ukraine war, for example, delayed renewable energy transitions across Europe and disrupted global grain markets, intensifying hunger and emissions in poorer countries. The UNEP warns that each protracted conflict sets back global decarbonisation timelines by years.
India’s role, therefore, extends beyond its borders. As one UNEP field officer remarked, “Peacebuilding is now part of climate policy.” India’s ecological diplomacy — through renewable alliances, climate financing, and community-led conservation — embodies this emerging paradigm.
From my standpoint as a researcher, the message is clear: peace is no longer a luxury in global politics; it is an environmental necessity. Every bomb dropped reverses decades of climate progress, every war fought steals time from adaptation and mitigation. The ultimate test of leadership will not be in how nations defend themselves, but in how they defend the planet that sustains them.
In this sense, India’s challenge — and opportunity — lies in proving that the pursuit of peace and the preservation of the planet are not parallel goals, but one and the same mission.