Ecocide Is the Word We’re Avoiding
We have a word for the destruction of people.
We do not yet have a legally recognized or universally enforced term for the deliberate or reckless destruction of ecosystems during war.
But the word exists.
It has circulated for decades in environmental law and international justice debates.
Ecocide.
Support independent work: chirp.me/jeremyjosephleal
And if the environmental data emerging from Gaza is taken seriously — the scale of rubble, the contamination of soil and water, the collapse of sewage systems, the destruction of cropland — then ecocide may be the most accurate word available to describe what is happening to the land itself.
Categorizing determines the crimes. And crimes determine accountability.
Without the right word, destruction becomes “collateral damage.”
With the right word, it becomes prosecutable.
As of now:
Ecocide is not an internationally recognized crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
It sits alongside genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression, but is not yet codified.
The governing treaty here is the International Criminal Court under the Rome Statute.
Environmental destruction can be prosecuted if it meets thresholds under:
War crimes (e.g., “widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment”)
Crimes against humanity (if tied to attacks on civilian populations)
Genocide (if environmental destruction is used to destroy a protected group)
But that’s indirect.
There is no standalone “ecocide” charge — yet.
International law does not enforce itself. The International Criminal Court has no standing police force; it relies on member states to cooperate, arrest, and surrender suspects. Major powers can resist or refuse jurisdiction. The United States, for example, has not ratified the Rome Statute, and enforcement often depends less on moral clarity than on geopolitical leverage.
This does not render the law meaningless. It reveals its structure. Legal categories shape what can be investigated, sanctioned, or historically recorded as crime — even when enforcement is uneven. Naming does not guarantee prosecution. But without naming, prosecution is structurally foreclosed.
The Data: Environmental Collapse in Gaza
This story was originally reported by Grist. Their coverage draws on research from the Arava Institute and the United Nations among others.
The findings are not abstract.
60,000+ killed
61 million tons of rubble
80% of cropland destroyed
$70B infrastructure damage
Sewage systems destroyed
Toxic particulate matter increasing respiratory illness
“The garbage becomes mountains,” said environmental chemist Yasser El-Nahhal, “and the mountains are a breeding site for mosquitos and rodents, which spread malaria.”
Before October 7, Gaza’s infrastructure was already fragile due to long-standing blockades. After two years of bombardment, researchers describe environmental conditions that will take decades to stabilize, if stabilization is even possible.
What This Means in Practical Terms
Environmental devastation does not pause when hostilities pause.
Rubble containing asbestos and munitions dust contaminates air for years
Destroyed wastewater systems poison aquifers
Cropland destruction alters food systems across generations
Soil toxicity reduces long-term agricultural viability
Ecological collapse compounds. It alters the future. And that's why I'm interested in the terminology that classifies it legally.
If environmental destruction is strategic, it is not collateral damage. It is policy.
The Legal Debate
Not everyone accepts the term ecocide. Some legal scholars argue that wartime environmental damage, while tragic, must meet an extremely high threshold to qualify as an international crime.
Others caution that expanding international criminal law risks politicization. But proponents argue that scale, duration, and foreseeability matter.
If destruction is:
Severe
Widespread
Long-term
And undertaken with knowledge of impact
Then it fits the definition many experts are attempting to codify. The debate is ongoing. The environmental damage is not.
Why Militarism Is Climate Policy
The U.S. military is the world’s largest single institutional emitter of greenhouse gases, with carbon output exceeding that of nearly 140 countries.
Between 2010 and 2019 alone, it released hundreds of millions of metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, driven largely by jet fuel, base operations, and global transport of personnel and equipment.
Researchers analyzing Department of Defense data from 1975 to 2022 found that military spending tracks closely with energy consumption, and that sustained cuts could produce annual energy savings comparable to the nation of Slovenia or the state of Delaware.
Yet militarism is rarely centered in climate discussions. War is framed geopolitically. Climate is framed environmentally.
The two are treated as separate conversations. They are not.
When bombs collapse wastewater treatment plants, the result is not just immediate devastation. it is long-term disease vectors, soil toxicity, air contamination, agricultural collapse.
When blockades restrict desalination infrastructure, water becomes weaponized.
Environmental degradation becomes inseparable from military strategy.
Which reframes the issue:
This is not only a humanitarian catastrophe.
It is an environmental one.
And environmental collapse operates on a clock that does not pause for ceasefires.
“We Don’t Have the Luxury of Time”
In a Q&A following Earth’s Greatest Enemy, the urgency was framed differently, not as panic, but as clarity.
“We simply don't have the luxury of time anymore or the luxury of just being atomized and isolated from the global struggle that we're all victims of.”
The synthesis is environmental. Particulate matter does not respect borders. Contaminated water does not remain local. Atmospheric carbon does not carry passports.
If ecocide becomes normalized as a byproduct of modern warfare, the implications extend far beyond one region.
Sources:
https://earthsgreatestenemy.com/
https://www.icc-cpi.int/publications/core-legal-texts/rome-statute-international-criminal-court
https://www.stopecocide.earth/bn-2025/scottish-parliament-votes-to-advance-ecocide-bill
https://www.newsweek.com/climate-change-us-military-pollution-carbon-emissions-2094434
Follow my work: https://chirp.me/jeremyjosephleal