Finn Stepputat
Senior Researcher
The Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Denmark
fst@diis.dk
Jairo Munive
Independent Researcher
Copenhagen, Denmark
In late 2022, the UN adopted a set of principles for the Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflict (PERAC). The attention to this problem is an important step, but many principles are non-binding and there is no set-up to ensure and monitor progress.
The problem
Ever since US forces used the herbicide Agent Orange to destroy forest cover and crops during the Vietnam war, there has been a slowly growing international awareness of the disastrous effects of armed conflict on the environment. Examples are plenty: during the first Gulf war, Iraqi forces provoked gigantic oil spills which caused a dramatic loss of biodiversity and left coastlines uninhabitable. The second Gulf war saw numerous oil fields being set on fire, as well as the infamous open burn pits for waste disposal. Armed groups have deliberately poisoned water sources, militaries have used ‘scorched earth’ tactics, and unlawful exploitation of natural resources for financing war has caused much damage to the environment. In Gaza, 2022, artillery shells set fire to hundreds of tons of pesticides, fertilizers, and other farming materials, causing groundwater contamination. And the ongoing war in Ukraine offers numerous examples of direct and incidental pollution of soil and water sources, caused by explosive and toxic remnants, the destruction of sewage, gas, and oil pipes, as well as chemical, power, and waste-water plants.
Knowledge in this field is still lagging, but it is well established that armed conflicts have both immediate and long-term effects on the environment and people’s livelihoods as well as on the triple planetary crisis of climate change, pollution, and loss of biodiversity. Therefore, in 2013, the UN commissioned its International Law Commission (ILC) to draft a set of ‘Principles for the Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflict’, also known as PERAC.
The principles
In late 2022, the ILC draft principles were discussed, modified, and adopted by the UN General Assembly. More than 40 countries, including Estonia, engaged actively in the process, with Sweden and Finland among the main drivers. The Nordic countries adopted a common position that favored legally binding commitments, while countries like the US, Canada, Russia, and France rejected binding commitments beyond existing treaties and legal frameworks.
The International Law Commission could built on the work of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which in 1994, based on the International Humanitarian Law (IHL), developed a set of guidelines. Here, the environment is civilian, unless it actively serves military objectives. It should therefore be afforded the same protection as civilians, including principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution. Hence, military forces must consider if the foreseeable damage caused to the environment is proportionate in relation to the military threat at hand.
But the new principles move beyond the IHL, the ‘law of war’, and includes the protection afforded the environment both before and after armed conflict in various legal fields, such as environmental law, human rights law, arms control, and corporate obligations. Before armed conflict, governments should designate particularly fragile or important environments as demilitarized zones, and the PERAC should be incorporated in military doctrine and training. After conflict, the parties should address the restoration and protection of damaged environment and deal with the hazardous remnants of war within their jurisdictions, including at sea.
PERAC also covers both international and non-international conflict, therefore serving as a reference for non-state armed groups and de facto authorities as well as state actors, occupying forces, private companies, and other stakeholders.
The challenges
The PERAC process has provided an important forum for dialogue and increased awareness of the issues at stake, but the framework for implementation is weak. A set of ‘principles’ is about the softest output that the UN can provide. Many principles relate to things that authorities ‘should’, rather than ‘must’, do, and the process of implementation doesn’t have a ‘home’.
Therefore, as the Conflict and Environment Observatory suggests, PERAC needs a group of states as custodians. They must push for the implementation of the PERAC, convince many more states and other stakeholders to buy into them, ensure exchange of good practices, and support the generation of better knowledge about relations between the environment and armed conflict as new weapons, tactics, and arenas of war emerge.
The PERAC is a historical contribution to the promotion of the environment in relation to armed conflict, and several organizations and platforms are pushing for increasing knowledge and action in this field. More than that, while non-state armed groups typically contribute to environmental hazards through fighting and unlawful exploitation of natural resources, some groups have taken up environmental issues to mobilize support, while others, such as the KNU in Myanmar, have developed environmental protection as a political vision.