The War Nobody Talks About in Climate Terms

The conflict in Iran is being reported as a military and geopolitical story. It is also an environmental catastrophe and the world has barely noticed.

When Israeli and US forces launched Operation Epic Fury on 28 February 2026, the immediate headlines focused on targets hit, missiles fired, and diplomatic fallout. What received far less attention was what was pouring into the air, the soil, the sea and the atmosphere.

Black Rain Over Tehran

On the nights of 7 and 8 March, airstrikes hit four major oil facilities in and around Tehran. The city, home to nine million people, filled with carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, soot and heavy metals. Hemmed in by mountains, the pollution had nowhere to go. It pushed down into the streets.

When rain finally came, it didn’t clean the air it turned oily and black. Residents reported sore throats, burning eyes, and sooty residue coating their homes and cars. Tehran’s “black rain” became an image of what modern industrial warfare does to civilian environments. It also left behind a legacy of contaminated soil and groundwater that will take years to assess.

A Polluted Sea With Nowhere to Drain

The Persian Gulf is shallow and almost entirely enclosed. Around 20 ships have been targeted so far, including oil tankers, and Iranian naval vessels have been sunk. More than 85 large oil tankers remain trapped in the Gulf, each one a potential catastrophe in waiting.

The Gulf’s coral reefs, seagrass beds and desalination plants on which millions of people depend for fresh water are all at serious risk. In an open ocean, a spill disperses. In the Persian Gulf, it accumulates.

The Numbers Behind the Smoke

In just the first two weeks of the conflict 28 February to 14 March the war generated almost 5.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. That is more than the entire annual emissions of Iceland or Kuwait, and roughly equal to the combined yearly output of the world’s 84 lowest emitting countries. All of it released in a fortnight.

The destruction of around 20,000 civilian buildings accounts for the largest single share. Military fuel consumption jets, warships, and ground vehicles burning an estimated 150 to 270 million litres of fuel in those two weeks added over half a million tonnes more.

The Methane Wildcard

Then came the strikes on South Pars, the world’s largest natural gas field, in mid-March. This is where the story takes a grimmer turn.

Methane, the main component of natural gas, is 28 to 34 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2 over a 100 year period, and far worse in the short term. When gas infrastructure is destroyed rather than burned, methane is released directly into the atmosphere unburned. Initial assessments suggest damaged facilities at South Pars may be releasing millions of cubic metres per day. There is no real modern precedent for this scale of gas field destruction in a conflict zone.

A Conflict With a Long Climate Tail

Wars don’t end when the shooting stops, not climatically. Russia’s war in Ukraine, now four years old, has generated greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to France’s entire annual output. The Iran conflict, at its current pace and with the South Pars damage factored in, may exceed that.

After the ceasefire, whenever it comes, tens of thousands of destroyed buildings will need to be rebuilt. Military budgets across the region and the world are rising sharply in response to the conflict, and higher military spending means higher military emissions. The environmental clock keeps running long after the last bomb falls.

What This Means for the Planet

Climate scientists calculate that humanity’s remaining carbon budget, the emissions we can still release while keeping warming below 1.5°C, is already desperately thin. Sudden spikes driven by conflict eat into that budget in ways that cannot be reclaimed. They also historically trigger increased fossil fuel investment as governments scramble to stabilise energy supply, pushing emissions higher still for years to come.

By 10 March, the Conflict and Environment Observatory had logged over 300 environmentally significant incidents across Iran, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Jordan, Cyprus, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Oman. The full accounting hasn’t begun yet.

We talk about the climate crisis as though it exists separately from war. It doesn’t. Every conflict is also an environmental event. This one, fought over and around some of the world’s largest fossil fuel infrastructure, may be among the most consequential we have seen.

Sources: Conflict and Environment Observatory (CEOBS); climate analysis from environmental research groups tracking the conflict; reported airstrikes on Iranian oil and gas infrastructure, March 2026.

Rethinking the “China Threat” Narrative: Defensive Posture or Western Anxiety?

The dominant narrative in Western media portrays China as an emerging threat to the international order. But what if this framing tells us more about Western insecurities than Chinese intentions? A closer examination suggests that China’s behavior may be primarily defensive, shaped by historical trauma and legitimate security concerns closer to home.

China’s actions don’t occur in a vacuum. The country’s leadership frequently invokes the “century of humiliation” the period from the 1840s to 1940s when foreign powers carved up Chinese territory and imposed unequal treaties. From this perspective, China’s military modernization and assertiveness aren’t about expansion but about ensuring that such subjugation never happens again.

Consider the military context: Western naval presence in the Asia-Pacific, extensive alliance networks, and regular patrols near Chinese waters all preceded China’s current military buildup. Chinese officials argue they’re responding to encirclement, not initiating aggression. The artificial islands in the South China Sea, often cited as evidence of expansionism, might alternatively be understood as attempts to secure maritime approaches and prevent potential blockades.

The Real Anxiety: Technological and Social Competition

Perhaps the deeper source of Western concern isn’t military capability but something more fundamental China has achieved technological and manufacturing prowess that rivals or exceeds Western capabilities, and it’s done so under a completely different political system.

China now leads in green technology, high-speed rail infrastructure, mobile payment systems, and certain artificial intelligence applications. Its manufacturing scale and efficiency remain unmatched globally. The country has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty while building world-class cities and infrastructure at a pace that makes Western development look sluggish.

This success challenges a core Western assumption: that economic development inevitably leads to liberal democracy. China’s state-directed capitalism and authoritarian governance have delivered results that create genuine cognitive dissonance for those who believed free markets required minimal state intervention and that political freedom was essential for innovation.

The West isn’t just concerned about military competition – it’s anxious about ideological competition. China offers an alternative model that appears to work, at least by certain metrics, and that’s profoundly unsettling to societies that have long assumed their political and economic systems represented the inevitable endpoint of development.

The India Factor: A Closer Threat

While Western commentators focus on trans-Pacific tensions, China’s most immediate security concerns may actually lie along its southwestern border.

The Sino-Indian relationship is complex and fraught with genuine tensions that have nothing to do with Western involvement. The two nuclear-armed giants share a disputed border where deadly clashes have occurred as recently as 2020. They compete for influence across South Asia and the Indian Ocean. India’s growing population, economic potential, and strengthening ties with Western powers likely represent a more immediate strategic concern for Beijing than abstract ideological competition with distant Western nations.

Unlike Taiwan or the South China Sea disputes, which China can frame as internal or historical matters, the India challenge is external, unpredictable, and growing. A rising India with demographic momentum, increasing military capability, and complex nationalist politics may represent the kind of instability and potential threat that genuinely keeps Chinese strategists awake at night.

The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Problem

There’s a dangerous circularity to the current dynamic. Western rhetoric about the “China threat” justifies military buildups and alliance strengthening. China interprets these moves as confirming its fears of containment and responds with its own military expansion and assertiveness. This validates Western concerns, leading to further escalation. Both sides can point to the other’s actions as proof of hostile intent.

This security dilemma spiral risks creating the very conflict both sides claim to want to avoid. If China is indeed acting primarily from defensive motivations, then Western threat inflation becomes not just inaccurate but actively counterproductive, pushing China toward the very behavior the West fears.

A More Nuanced View

None of this means China’s government is beyond criticism. Surveillance systems, restricted speech, policies in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, and pressure on Taiwan are legitimate concerns. The question is whether these make China a threat to the West specifically, or whether they represent internal governance approaches that the international community finds troubling.

Perhaps the real issue isn’t whether China threatens the West militarily, but whether the West can psychologically accept a world where a non-Western power achieves technological and economic parity under a different political system. That’s a more honest conversation than framing everything through the lens of military threat.

The challenge moving forward is distinguishing between genuine security concerns, competitive anxiety, and ideological discomfort. Only by doing so can we avoid stumbling into conflicts that serve neither side’s true interests while addressing the legitimate questions about governance, human rights, and international norms that do deserve serious discussion.

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑