Article by Matei Alexianu
As climate change accelerates, conflicts play a major role in exacerbating the climate crisis and its devastating effects. Recent evidence from Gaza and Ukraine reveals that the greenhouse gas emissions stemming from conflict can rival the peacetime emissions of industrialized countries. At the same time, climate change exacerbates civilian and environmental vulnerability during conflicts, increasing the humanitarian toll of war. Yet despite their severity, these climate-related harms from conflict fall between the cracks of international environmental law on one side and international humanitarian law on the other.
This Article proposes a new approach to regulating (at least some of) the climate-related effects of war: using interpretive tools and climate science to bring climate considerations within the ambit of the targeting rules of international humanitarian law. Deploying this interpretive methodology, the Article seeks to show that the humanitarian law rules of proportionality and precautions require belligerents to consider both the climate vulnerability of their targets and the expected greenhouse gas emissions of their attacks. If implemented, this interpretive approach could save countless lives and spare the environment from some of the worst climate-related impacts of conflict.
The Article begins by describing two mutually reinforcing interactions between armed conflict and climate change: the warming climate's amplification of the humanitarian effects of attacks (the “vulnerability pathway”) and the additional climate-forcing emissions caused by those attacks (the “emissions pathway”). Next, the Article considers the various humanitarian law rules potentially applicable to these pathways and identifies the proportionality and precautions rules as the most suitable regulatory frameworks. The Article then demonstrates how these rules can be interpreted to incorporate climate change considerations. Finally, the Article reflects on compliance, assesses the limitations of the approach proposed, and discusses complementary measures.
About the Author
Matei Alexianu, Associate, Foley Hoag LLP; J.D., Yale Law School; Diploma, The Hague Academy of International Law.
Citation
100 Tul. L. Rev. 639