Warfare as ecocide: How military-industrial complexes weaponise ecosystems and evade accountability under extractivist geopolitics

Indigenous communities from the Amazon to the Arctic have documented how militarised resource extraction (e.g., oil drilling in the Niger Delta, lithium mining in the Atacama) mirrors the logics of war—displacement, contamination, and cultural erasure. Treaties like the 2016 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples are routinely violated by states prioritising military-industrial expansion over territorial sovereignty. The erasure of these perspectives in environmental law reflects a broader epistemic violence where Indigenous knowledge is deemed 'unscientific' despite its empirical basis in long-term ecological stewardship.

The 20th century saw deliberate ecocide as a tool of war, from the British scorched-earth tactics in Kenya’s Mau Mau uprising to the US’s Agent Orange in Vietnam, which defoliated 2.6 million acres. Colonial powers institutionalised resource extraction as warfare, with rubber in the Congo (King Leopold’s regime) and cotton in India (British East India Company) functioning as extractive militarism. The post-WWII Nuremberg Principles failed to prosecute environmental destruction, setting a precedent for impunity that persists in modern conflicts like Syria’s oil-field torching by ISIS and Russia’s weaponisation of dams in Ukraine.

In Latin America, the Zapatista movement’s defence of communal land against paramilitary and corporate violence exemplifies how Indigenous autonomy resists ecocidal warfare. Pacific Island nations, facing rising seas from Western militarisation, have invoked the 'Blue Pacific' framework to demand climate reparations from nuclear-testing states like France and the US. The African Union’s 'Silencing the Guns' initiative, while flawed, recognises that resource conflicts are not natural but manufactured by global extractivist systems, linking local wars to transnational capital flows.

Military activities contribute 5-6% of global greenhouse gas emissions, with the US Department of Defense being the world’s largest institutional oil consumer. Studies show that war zones exhibit 'ecological release'—the collapse of predator-prey dynamics due to human violence—leading to cascading biodiversity loss (e.g., post-Syrian civil war desertification). The scientific consensus on 'ecocide' as a distinct crime is growing, but lacks enforcement mechanisms due to lobbying by arms manufacturers and fossil fuel industries.

Artists like Ai Weiwei and Kara Walker have used their work to expose the spiritual desecration of war, framing environmental destruction as a form of cultural genocide. In Buddhist traditions, the concept of 'dukkha' (suffering) extends to non-human beings, making ecocide a violation of interbeing. Indigenous artists such as Jaune Quick-to-See Smith depict the land as a wounded body, while Palestinian poets like Mahmoud Darwish mourn the 'green massacre' of olive groves—a symbol of both cultural heritage and ecological resilience.

Scenario modelling by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) predicts that by 2050, climate-induced resource wars could displace 1 billion people, with military emissions exacerbating droughts in the Sahel and Middle East. The 'Green New Deal for the Military' proposal suggests redirecting 10% of global military budgets to renewable energy and ecological restoration, but faces opposition from arms lobbies. Alternative futures include 'eco-defence' models where communities use permaculture and nonviolent resistance to protect land from militarisation, as seen in the Chipko Movement’s revival in India.

Women environmental defenders in Colombia, the Philippines, and Kenya face assassination rates 4x higher than other activists, with 60% of killings linked to resource conflicts. The UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment has documented how racialised communities (e.g., Black and Indigenous groups in the US, Dalits in India) bear disproportionate burdens of military pollution, from uranium mining on Navajo lands to pesticide exposure in Gaza. Grassroots networks like the 'Women’s Major Group' at the UN argue that legal accountability must centre reparations for historical harms, not just future crimes.