Genocides are anti-environmental
For every drop of blood spilt, we hit back Mother Earth for twice the damage

We like to think that conflict stems from ideals—that humans generate war on each other because of our beliefs and values. However, when you boil most conflicts down to its root causes, it comes down to land and resources. It is ironic when the conflicts fought for these resources are the same ones that end up destroying them. 

The First Climate Change Conflict

Britannica describes the 2003 genocide that happened in Darfur, Sudan, as a conflict between the Arab government and non-Arab parts of the continent.  While the conflict fits into the unfortunate mold of wars and terrorism we are accustomed to, this isn’t the whole story.

Sudan is one of the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world. It is among the hottest countries on the planet, with fluctuating rainfall patterns. As droughts occur more frequently and last longer, Sudan’s desert expands. For a country that depends on agriculture and livestock, it is a catastrophe.

Sudan has two primary agricultural groups: settled farmers and nomadic herders. The latter is predominantly Arab, culturally, while the former is of ethno-African descent. When there were plenty of resources, both groups could co-exist peacefully.

But as resources grew scarce from the worsening climate, tensions started to flare. The government drew lines, prioritising the Arab community. All of these factors erupted in the genocide that worsened the situation.

As people moved to refugee camps, deforestation accelerated to make the new camps, and underground aquifers were drained in the already water-poor state. The conflict led to the loss of at least 6126 hectares of natural vegetation alone.

We can see this same pattern of resource scarcity leading to war in the Rwandan genocide, where the majority ethnic group Hutus hunted down the minority Tutsu group. 

While there are multiple sociopolitical, economic and cultural factors for the genocide, the environment also played a big part. Rwanda suffered from having “too many” people on “too little” land. As people had less land to feed and support themselves, unrest grew. Eventually, it erupted into a genocide, which worsened the problem.

Similar to Darfur, an increased number of refugees and displaced persons from the conflict led to increased rates of deforestation. Natural forest used to cover 36% of Rwanda, but 78% of those forests were destroyed between 1994 and 2005.

“It has gone back to dessert now”

Since the start of the large-scale conflict on October 7, 2023, Israel has dropped more than 25,000 tons of explosives on the Gaza strip. In comparison, the nuclear bombs the US dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 were about 15,000 tonnes.

These bombs have a devastating impact upon Gaza’s ability to feed itself. More than half of Gaza’s vegetation land has been destroyed by the bombings. Gaza’s once vibrant strawberry fields, date trees, olive trees, and orange trees have been stripped to nothing. In February, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) found significant damage to 626 wells, 307 home barns, 235 chicken farms, 203 sheep farms and 119 animal shelters.

A member of the Abu Suffiyeh family, who used to run a farm in east Jabalia, close to Gaza’s north-east border, was reported saying: “it is now the same as it was before: desert…There is no single tree there. No traces of prior life. If I was to go there, I wouldn’t be able to recognize it.” 

The bombings have also permanently damaged Gaza’s soil for years. The materials from explosives such as phosphorous bombs will seep into the land, contaminating the soil and groundwater for years to come. 

The Irony of Destroying Resources

All genocides mentioned have been about acquiring natural resources. In Darfur and Rwanda, major factors for the genocide was the competition for scarce resources. In Gaza, it was a competition for who owns which land. 

Those same conflicts that are fought over resources end up destroying more resources, and worsening the problem. We tend to think of rescuing the environment as a fundamentally different problem from other social issues. However, the reality is that whether we notice it or not, everything humans do is tied to the environment. Even when we kill ourselves, we can’t help but also hurt the environment, and take away resources from an already starving world.

As an Indian, one of my favorite stories is the Mahabharata, which ends with a large war that ends millions of lives. So much blood is lost, it dyes the battlefield red. This is supposed to be our penance to Mother Earth, whom we took so much from without giving anything back.

Today, I can’t help but look at that message differently. Because now, for every drop of blood spilt, we hit back Mother Earth for twice the damage.