A new report by Greenpeace Middle East and North Africa warned that the war in southern Lebanon is leaving behind what environmental advocates describe as a growing “ecocide,” with widespread destruction of farmland, forests, water resources and entire ecosystems that could take decades to recover.

The report, titled “Annihilating South Lebanon: What We Know So Far About Ecocide and Urban Devastation,” argues that the environmental impact of the conflict has evolved far beyond immediate military destruction, transforming large parts of southern Lebanon into what researchers describe as a devastated ecological zone marked by scorched agricultural land, contaminated soil, damaged biodiversity and collapsing rural livelihoods.

The report places particular emphasis on the environmental consequences of the fighting, warning that the destruction of ecosystems and agricultural infrastructure threatens Lebanon’s already fragile food security system at a time when the country remains trapped in economic collapse.

Greenpeace argues that the environmental devastation unfolding in southern Lebanon increasingly resembles what experts and legal advocates describe as “ecocide” — the large-scale destruction of ecosystems severe enough to threaten the long-term survival, health and stability of civilian communities.

The report says entire agricultural landscapes have been damaged or abandoned, including olive groves, tobacco fields, citrus orchards and farmland that once sustained local economies across southern Lebanon. It warns that the destruction of centuries-old olive trees and fertile agricultural areas could carry long-term economic and cultural consequences for communities whose livelihoods have depended on the land for generations.

According to Greenpeace, repeated bombardment and fires have also accelerated forest destruction across southern Lebanon, damaging biodiversity and weakening ecosystems already vulnerable to climate stress and desertification.

The organization warns that environmental damage caused by war does not end when the fighting stops.

“When water is polluted, farmland is destroyed, air is contaminated, and ecosystems are damaged, people’s health, safety, livelihoods, and dignity are harmed too,” Greenpeace MENA Executive Director Ghiwa Nakat said in a separate statement addressing the regional environmental impact of war.

The report raises concerns about widespread contamination from explosives, military debris, fuel residues and damaged infrastructure, warning that toxic remnants may seep into soil and groundwater systems long after the conflict subsides.

Greenpeace also points to reports of incendiary weapons and white phosphorus use in southern border areas, warning that such weapons can ignite forests, devastate crops and leave behind hazardous chemical contamination with potentially long-lasting health and environmental effects.

According to the report, the damage extends beyond farmland and forests to water resources and irrigation infrastructure that sustain agricultural production in the south. It warns that contamination and destruction affecting groundwater, reservoirs and irrigation systems could deepen Lebanon’s water crisis and undermine future agricultural recovery efforts.

The report further highlights concerns over the impact on marine ecosystems along Lebanon’s coastline, where pollution linked to bombardment, debris and damaged infrastructure risks affecting fisheries and coastal biodiversity.

Greenpeace argues that the environmental cost of war is often underreported and politically sidelined, even though ecological destruction directly affects public health, economic stability and the long-term ability of displaced communities to return home.

“The natural world cannot be rebuilt overnight,” the organization said, warning that the destruction of forests, farmland and water systems could intensify food insecurity, economic collapse and climate vulnerability across Lebanon and the wider region.

The report stresses that environmental devastation has become inseparable from the broader humanitarian crisis in southern Lebanon.

As villages are emptied and agricultural production declines, families lose not only homes but also their primary sources of income and food. Greenpeace warns that environmental collapse contributes directly to displacement by making entire areas increasingly difficult to inhabit or sustain economically.

The organization also links the destruction in Lebanon to broader regional and global climate concerns, noting that military conflicts contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions while simultaneously destroying ecosystems that help mitigate climate change.

According to Greenpeace, military-related emissions remain largely excluded from international climate agreements and environmental accountability frameworks despite estimates that armed conflicts account for a substantial share of global carbon emissions.

The report calls for independent environmental investigations into the damage caused during the conflict, alongside stronger accountability mechanisms and long-term ecological remediation plans.

It also urges that environmental destruction be incorporated into ceasefire arrangements, reconstruction efforts and international discussions on Lebanon’s recovery, arguing that rebuilding homes and infrastructure without addressing ecological collapse would leave entire communities vulnerable for years to come.

Greenpeace concludes that the devastation in southern Lebanon should not be viewed merely as collateral wartime damage, but as part of a broader pattern in which war systematically destroys the environmental foundations necessary for civilian survival.

For many residents displaced from southern Lebanon, the report suggests, the question is no longer only when the fighting will stop, but whether the land itself will remain capable of sustaining life once the war is over.