Ecocide in Gaza: How Environmental Destruction Became a Weapon of War 

In a landmark ruling, the International People’s Tribunal on Palestine has accused Israel of committing ecocide in Gaza, defining the systematic destruction of the environment as a weapon to guarantee the objectives of genocide.

The tribunal found that Israeli forces have deliberately razed farms, destroyed 97% of Gaza’s trees, and obliterated water sources and irrigation systems, creating long-term, severe damage to the natural environment that makes the land uninhabitable and prevents the return of the Palestinian people. This calculated environmental devastation, which goes beyond collateral damage to constitute a criminal act, was presented alongside charges of genocide and war crimes, with the tribunal emerging to address accountability gaps after formal international institutions like the ICC failed to enforce their own mandates against such destruction.

Ecocide in Gaza: How Environmental Destruction Became a Weapon of War 

When the soil is poisoned and the land stripped bare, a people’s connection to their past and future is severed. 

In November 2025, prosecutors at the International People’s Tribunal on Palestine delivered a devastating accusation: Israel’s systematic destruction of Gaza’s environment constitutes ecocide, deployed as a tool to guarantee the objectives of genocide. The tribunal revealed that Israel has destroyed approximately 97% of Gaza’s trees, 95% of its shrubland, and 82% of its annual crops, creating conditions that make the land potentially uninhabitable for generations. 

The Unseen Victim: Gaza’s Environment 

The concept of ecocide refers to widespread, long-term damage to the natural environment that severely disrupts life for the people who depend on it. At the tribunal in Barcelona, evidence presented went beyond typical war damage, showing a calculated pattern of environmental destruction seemingly designed to render Gaza permanently uninhabitable. 

Omar Nashabe, a scholar of international human rights law who testified as an expert witness, explained the strategic thinking behind this destruction: “You kill the people, you need to not allow them to go back to the land, so you destroy the land.” This testimony suggests that environmental devastation serves as both a immediate weapon and a guarantee against future return. 

The tribunal heard firsthand accounts from witnesses who described the methodical nature of this destruction. One anonymous witness testified that “Israeli tanks and bulldozers entered the land to destroy and raze it again, cutting irrigation networks, destroying water sources like agricultural ponds and wells, and shredding the remnants of the trees.” This went beyond immediate military necessity, appearing instead as a systematic effort to erase Gaza’s agricultural capacity. 

The Mechanisms of Destruction 

The environmental assault on Gaza has taken multiple forms, each targeting essential life-supporting systems: 

• Water System Destruction: Deliberate targeting of water infrastructure, including wells, agricultural ponds, and irrigation networks, has created a potable water crisis that affects every living person in Gaza. 

• Agricultural Annihilation: The near-total destruction of crop lands and olive groves has not only eliminated food sources but also a crucial economic foundation for the population. 

• Soil Contamination: The widespread use of explosive weapons and the rubble from destroyed buildings have left toxic residues in the soil, compromising future agricultural potential. 

The following table summarizes the devastating scale of environmental destruction documented at the tribunal: 

Ecocide as a Component of Genocide 

The International People’s Tribunal placed the environmental destruction within the broader context of genocide. The concept of ecocide helps bridge the gap between immediate violence and long-term displacement – when the land itself becomes unable to support life, return becomes impossible. 

The Gaza Tribunal, which convened earlier in Istanbul, similarly condemned what it called “an ongoing genocide” and a “coherent and consistent pattern of exterminatory violence.” This violence included intentional destruction of infrastructure leading to “profound cultural loss and community disintegration.”  

The tribunal specifically emphasized that “the weaponization of hunger, denial of medical care, and forced displacement are not collateral damages of war—they are instruments of collective punishment … and of genocide.” This framing challenges the narrative that such destruction is merely an unfortunate byproduct of conflict, instead positioning it as a deliberate tool. 

Expanded Definitions of Destruction 

The Istanbul tribunal introduced several innovative concepts that help us understand the multifaceted nature of the destruction:  

• Domicide: Beyond the physical destruction of homes, this includes the destruction of “memories, hopes and cultural continuity” – the emotional and historical connections to place. 

• Ecocide: “Catastrophic environmental damage that destroys capacity to survive after bombing ceases” – ensuring the harm continues long after active conflict ends. 

• Reprocide: “Systematic targeting of Palestinian reproductive care to eliminate future lives and the ability to safely reproduce” – an attack on future generations. 

• Scholasticide: “The genocide of knowledge through killing, silencing and displacing a generation of students and teachers” – destroying the intellectual foundation of society. 

These expanded definitions reveal a comprehensive understanding of how destruction operates in modern conflict, targeting not just present lives but future possibilities. 

The Legal Landscape and International Failure 

The International People’s Tribunal emerged precisely because formal international legal mechanisms have repeatedly failed to hold perpetrators accountable. As the tribunal jurors noted, they operate “in a long tradition of civil society initiatives that emerge specifically to address accountability gaps within formal international institutions.” 

This failure exists despite existing legal frameworks that should prevent such destruction. The Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, already recognizes attacks causing “widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment” as a war crime. However, enforcement has been consistently blocked by political interests. 

The Istanbul tribunal specifically accused Western governments – particularly the United States – of complicity by providing “diplomatic cover, weapons, weapon parts, intelligence, military assistance and training.” This constitutes what they termed “a breach of their legal duty to prevent genocide and to cooperate to end a violation of a peremptory norm of international law.”  

The People’s Tribunal as Historical Archive 

Beyond delivering judgments, the tribunal saw itself as creating “a valuable archive … providing lasting evidence of the truth of the genocide against the Palestinian people.” In circumstances where traditional judicial mechanisms fail, civil society initiatives can serve as historical witnesses, ensuring that evidence is preserved for future accountability. 

The jury statement from Istanbul articulated this role clearly: “The Jury, guided by conscience and informed by international law, does not speak with the authority of states, but when law is silenced by power, conscience must become the final tribunal.”  

The Way Forward: Recognition and Resistance 

The International People’s Tribunal concluded with a call to action, urging people of conscience everywhere to support movements like BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) and to pressure their governments to end complicity. As lead prosecutor Jan Fermon stated, the verdict should become “one of the building stones of all these efforts around the world…to achieve accountability for what has been done.” 

The recognition of ecocide could be transformational, reframing environmental harm from collateral damage to criminal violence. Mohammed Usrof, founder of the Palestine Institute for Climate Strategy, noted that “recognition of ecocide could be transformational” in how we understand and prevent such destruction in future conflicts. 

A Global Pattern 

This case in Gaza reflects a broader global pattern where environmental destruction has become a tool of conflict. From the burning of oil fields in the Gulf War to the deliberate poisoning of water sources in various conflicts, attacking the environment has increasingly become a way to attack populations indirectly and with long-lasting consequences. 

The warning from the Istanbul tribunal resonates beyond Palestine: “Silence is not neutral; silence is complicity; neutrality is surrender to evil.” As we witness the systematic destruction of Gaza’s environment, we’re reminded that the health of our planet and the rights of its people are inextricably linked – when we allow one to be attacked, we enable the destruction of both. 

The story of Gaza‘s environment is a dark chapter in humanity’s relationship with both nature and itself. It challenges us to expand our understanding of violence in the 21st century and to recognize that sometimes, the most silent victim speaks the loudest truth.