The question keeps coming up: are today’s wars the beginning of, or a prelude to, a new world war? But maybe that’s the wrong question. Because it increasingly looks like a war is being waged against the world itself, and against the values that have guided modern society since 1945: human dignity, democracy, a humane international legal order, economic equality, transparent and truthful information, and care for the environment and climate. The current war in the Middle East appears to be an escalation of an attack on all those values that has been underway for years. And that is nothing less than a war against the world.
The war in the Middle East once again shows how fragile a fossil-fuel-based global system is. Burning oil and gas fields are not abstract “market disruptions,” but physical infernos that set air, soil, and politics ablaze at the same time.
Every facility on fire burns in a short time, what would otherwise have been consumed over months or years. The result is a massive spike in emissions, precisely at a moment when climate change is already accelerating and crossing critical thresholds.
With three climate effects at once, large additional amounts of CO₂ are released, on top of “normal” emissions. Due to incomplete combustion, methane and other hydrocarbons escape, greenhouse gases that are far more potent than CO₂. And the black smoke plumes are full of soot (black carbon). This warms the atmosphere and, when it settles on snow and ice, can accelerate melting because darker surfaces absorb more sunlight.
Air that scrapes your lungs
For people in the region, the climate story is not the first concern; it is the air they breathe. Images of black clouds over refineries and gas installations translate into very real health risks.
The smoke contains fine particulate matter that penetrates deep into the lungs, sulfur and nitrogen oxides that can form ozone and acid rain, and volatile organic compounds and metals, including carcinogenic or neurotoxic components.
Farmers see their crops covered in soot; leaves burn, photosynthesis is inhibited, and yields decline. Children, the elderly, and people with heart and lung conditions are the most vulnerable: they pay the price for every day that air quality is extremely poor. When we talk about ppm of CO₂, they are dealing with pain, coughing fits, and overcrowded hospitals.
Soil and water: the creeping consequences
Smoke is visible, but much of the environmental damage is not. Deposition of soot and acids contaminates soil, surface water, and eventually groundwater. In coastal areas, fires increase the risk of leaks: oil and condensate can end up in the sea, damaging coral reefs, mangroves, and fish stocks. Historical examples from Kuwait (1991) and Iraq show that such contamination can linger for decades, long after the smoke has disappeared from the news.
Shockwaves through the energy system
The fires are not only a local environmental disaster, but also a shockwave through the global energy system. Production is disrupted, and transport becomes riskier or more expensive.
The reflex is familiar: oil and gas prices rise, countries scramble for alternative sources, more LNG shipments, more gas from other regions, sometimes even the reopening or expansion of coal plants, governments invest in new fossil infrastructure “just in case”: terminals, pipelines, strategic reserves.
In this way, a war that destroys fossil infrastructure in one region can lead to more fossil capacity elsewhere. The short-term logic of energy security collides head-on with the long-term logic of climate policy.
Yet within the same crisis lies an opportunity. War makes visible what remains abstract in calmer times: dependence. Suddenly, “security” is not only about tanks and missiles, but also about power outlets and thermostats.
Two reflexes compete for dominance:
- The old reflex: more of the same, just from somewhere else. That means new drilling, additional pipelines, longer lifespans for polluting plants.
- The transition reflex: if this is so vulnerable, we need far less oil and gas. That means accelerated insulation, electrification, renewable generation, more efficient systems, and energy savings.
Historically, the result is often a mix. After the oil crisis of the 1970s, both new fossil projects and a wave of energy conservation and alternative energy followed. The question is which direction will prevail now, when the remaining climate space is far smaller than it was then.
War and climate: two sides of the same coin
If there is one lesson from the burning fields in the Middle East, it is that war and climate are not separate. As long as large parts of the world depend on fossil resources from politically unstable regions, the climate crisis and war are two sides of the same coin. War is also an assault on the climate, not only through burning oil and gas fields, but also through the war machine itself, the militaries (including those of countries not directly involved that increase their readiness) and their emissions, and through the future reconstruction of infrastructure.
Attention diverted
No less damaging is the way attention is diverted from attacks on the rule of law, on democracy, human dignity, truth, and transparent information. In the shadow of war, the hunger for power among aggressive politicians and billionaires continues to erode the world as we know it. It is an old tactic: starting a war when the political ground at home becomes too hot to stand on. And that old tactic, combined with old-fashioned warfare, contributes to a new kind of war that extends far beyond the battlefield: a war against the world.
