War, military pollution and empty climate oaths

It was at the Dubai Climate Summit that I first met senior journalist Rula Asaad. During our conversation, she said, ‘...Climate justice is impossible without ending war and genocide. Children are being killed unjustly in Gaza. Every aspect of war—from the manufacturing of weapons to the conduct of military operations—intensifies the risks of climate change. We must decide whether to reduce these risks or fuel them. Under the Paris Climate Agreement, we pledged to lower climate risks. Repeatedly forgetting those commitments is itself an injustice.’

Across the globe, the call to ‘demilitarize’ climate action by ending wars and genocide is growing louder. There have also been demands to redirect investment away from the military sector and towards ‘climate finance’.

Yet global leaders have failed to keep their promises. Instead, the ‘war market' continues to grow, becoming more volatile and prolonged. Every conflict triggers massive carbon emissions and environmental devastation. While staggering amounts of fresh water are consumed to produce military equipment, women and children in the slums and villages of the Global South wait for hours just to collect a single container of water.

Today, 5 June, marks World Environment Day, observed this year under the theme ‘Climate Action.’ It has been nearly a decade since the 2015 Paris Agreement set the roadmap to address climate change by limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees, slashing fossil fuel use and securing a global climate fund.

Central to this were the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC)—the pledges made by each nation to curb their carbon footprint. While Bangladesh did submit its NDC, the ‘war-mongering’ United States failed to do so at the last summit.

Historically, the United States and European countries have been responsible for a large share of global carbon pollution. Today, however, China has overtaken them to become the world's largest emitter, accounting for 32 percent of global carbon emissions, compared to the US at 13 percent. On a per-capita basis, carbon emissions are highest in Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait.

According to the World Bank's ‘Bangladesh Country Climate and Development Report 2022’, Bangladesh contributes just 0.4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet despite such a small contribution, why are poor women on our coasts forced to undergo hysterectomies because of the extreme salinity in their water? Why are young farmers being displaced from Haor villages inundated by flash floods year after year? No climate summit has ever answered these questions.

In the global ledgers of greenhouse gas emissions, the pollution from weapons factories, military operations and war is almost always hidden. Estimates suggest that the military sector is responsible for 5.5 percent of all global emissions.

The Paris Agreement does not mandate the disclosure of ‘military emissions’, it is treated as a voluntary act. Since there is no obligation, no state feels the responsibility to come clean. Some governments even argue that releasing such information could pose a threat to national security. This ‘military emissions gap’ raises serious questions about transparency and accountability in global climate governance.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) lists wealthy and high-emitting countries as ‘Annex-1’ countries. Even if military-emissions reporting were to become mandatory, it would only apply to the 43 countries on that list. Countries with large military sectors and defence spending such as China, Israel, Saudi Arabia and India might never have to disclose their military footprints because they are classified as non-Annex I states.

Under the guidelines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), emissions are sorted into various category codes but military pollution is never specifically identified. It is time to stop the cover-up. Every sector, every source of emission, must be laid bare in the public domain.

According to ‘MilitaryEmissions.org,’ the bulk of military pollution is generated by the hardware of war—weaponry, fighter jets, naval fleets and combat vehicles. Policy analyst Grace Alexander points out that military giants like the US, China and Russia still keep their emissions data partially veiled, refusing full transparency.

 A study by the Sweden-based Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which researches arms trade, military expenditure and disarmament, found that global military spending surged by 9.4 percent between 2023 and 2024. Meanwhile, a 2025 report by the Conflict and Environment Observatory (CEOBS) found that many of the world's 60 largest military spenders fail to fully disclose their greenhouse gas emissions, leaving a significant gap in global climate reporting.

The inconsistencies in the data are often absurd. Take Russia, for example. In 2020, it reported 40 million tons of carbon emissions. By 2022, that figure supposedly dropped to just 15 million tons. But 2022 was the year Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It is physically impossible for a fossil-fuel-intensive war to result in a drop in emissions.

These accounting tricks must end. For climate accountability to be meaningful, military emissions can no longer remain a blind spot. The disclosure of military-sector emissions should be made mandatory.

The military’s carbon footprint has a name of its own, the ‘Carbon Bootprint.’ If the world is to survive this climate crisis, the bootprint must be halted. The future of a planet cannot be allowed to be crushed under a military boot. Wars destroy forests and ecosystems. Vast forest areas were devastated in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos during decades of conflict. More recently, large tracts of forest in Nagorno-Karabakh were burned amid the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

War also creates enormous secondary emissions. In countries left bloodied and in ruins, supplying food, water, electricity and shelter to civilian populations requires large amounts of fossil fuel. The displacement of people leads to refugee camps that force shifts in land use, destroying forests and ecosystems alike. Just how forests and elephant corridors in Cox's Bazar have been damaged to accommodate Rohingya refugees displaced from Myanmar.

Armed conflict also threatens oil and gas infrastructure, disrupting extraction and supply systems. This often leads to increased ‘gas flaring’—the burning of excess natural gas—which contributes significantly to environmental pollution. According to data from the Colorado School of Mines (2020), gas flaring surged across Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen because of conflict.

The climate impacts of war extend well beyond the battlefield. The waste management crisis and the massive task of reconstruction leave a long-term scar on the environment. In war-torn Libya, nearly 90 percent of wastewater is dumped directly into the sea without any treatment. Gaza and Yemen are also facing the same reality.

A joint study by the European Climate Foundation and Ukraine’s Environmental Policy and Advocacy Initiative found that emissions resulting from the Russia–Ukraine war are equivalent to the combined output of 260 coal-fired power plants, each with a 200-megawatt capacity.

The machinery of war remains concentrated in a few hands. Analyzing data from 2021 to 2025, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) identified 66 nations as primary arms suppliers. However, just five geopolitical giants—United States, France, Russia, Germany and China control a massive 70 per cent of the global arms trade.

 Even when not formally listed as sponsors, military-linked companies are often present in climate conferences. At the same time, several high-emission corporations in agrochemicals, beverages, meat, food and cosmetics sectors also sponsor climate-related forums.

The time has come to liberate climate dialogue from the clutches of colonialism and militarization. The world must unite behind a genuine people's struggle for climate justice.