Israel and Its Neighbours: Environmental and Public Health Consequences of Recurrent Conflict, 1948–2026Pre-conference analytical framing note
A note on countingThe number of conflicts involving Israel and its neighbours depends on methodology. A narrow count, limited to major interstate wars and large-scale campaigns, gives roughly 17 major episodes. A broader count, including intifadas, Gaza operations, Lebanon border conflicts, Syrian front incidents, Iran-related escalation, missile and drone exchanges and maritime-linked confrontations, can reach approximately 30–38 episodes.Therefore, this brief does not use a single fixed number. It treats the case as a long-duration regional conflict system rather than a closed list of separate wars.
Purpose of this briefThis brief provides a neutral environmental and public-health framing for the long cycle of conflicts involving Israel and its neighbours from 1948 to the present. It does not attempt to summarize every war, military operation, uprising or cross-border escalation. The conflict history is too long, politically contested and still ongoing. Instead, the purpose is to identify recurring environmental exposure systems and public-health pathways that appear across different phases of conflict.This approach is better suited for conference discussion. Participants do not need another chronological history of the Arab–Israeli conflict. They need a shared framework for understanding how recurrent conflict affects water, soil, waste, energy, agriculture, urban infrastructure, explosive remnants of war, health services and long-term recovery.
1. Why a single long-period brief is preferableThe conflicts involving Israel and neighbouring populations and states include interstate wars, occupation-related violence, cross-border wars, urban warfare, rocket and missile attacks, siege conditions, insurgency, counterinsurgency, displacement, border militarization and regional escalation. Treating each episode separately would produce a fragmented and repetitive set of notes.A single long-period environmental-health brief is more useful because many of the exposure pathways recur across time and geography:• damage to water and sanitation infrastructure;• destruction of housing and urban services;• accumulation of rubble and hazardous debris;• damage to agricultural land and livelihoods;• contamination from military residues and explosive remnants;• attacks on or disruption of energy systems;• pressure on hospitals and emergency care;• long-term mental-health trauma;• delayed reconstruction caused by insecurity, blockade, political fragmentation or renewed escalation.This does not mean that all conflicts are identical. Gaza, Lebanon, the Golan Heights, southern Israel, the West Bank, Syria, Jordan, Egypt and the wider regional arena each have different environmental profiles. But a comparative brief should emphasize the recurring mechanisms rather than repeat the political narrative.
2. Conflict and exposure settingThe relevant geography includes the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Israel, southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights, parts of Syria, Jordan, Egypt/Sinai, the eastern Mediterranean coast and, in more recent regional escalation, Iran and the wider Middle East missile and drone environment.The region is environmentally sensitive. It includes arid and semi-arid zones, scarce freshwater resources, shared aquifers, coastal ecosystems, densely populated urban areas, agricultural terraces, olive groves, rangelands, ports, energy infrastructure and fragile waste-management systems. This means that military damage often interacts with pre-existing water scarcity, high population density, climate stress and limited land availability.
3. Water and sanitation as the central public-health pathwayWater is the most important recurring environmental-health issue in this conflict system. In Gaza, the coastal aquifer, desalination facilities, wastewater treatment plants, sewage networks and water pipelines have repeatedly been damaged, overloaded or made inaccessible. UNEP’s 2020 State of Environment and Outlook Report for the occupied Palestinian territory already described serious environmental degradation, including pressure on water resources, wastewater, solid waste and land degradation before the latest escalation.The more recent Gaza conflict has sharply worsened this situation. UNEP’s 2024 and 2025 reporting on Gaza emphasizes damage to water, sanitation and solid-waste systems, contamination risks to the coastal aquifer, sewage-system collapse and the difficulty of environmental monitoring during active conflict.The core public-health pathways are:• reduced access to safe drinking water;• dependence on unsafe water sources;• collapse or interruption of sewage treatment;• contamination of groundwater and coastal waters;• accumulation of waste near shelters and camps;• increased risk of diarrhoeal disease and waterborne infections;• reduced hygiene during displacement;• higher risk for children, older people, pregnant women and people with chronic disease.For conference discussion, water should not be treated as a humanitarian side issue. It is the main link between military damage, environmental exposure and population health.
4. Urban destruction, debris and hazardous rubbleUrban destruction is another recurring feature, especially in Gaza and Lebanon. Dense urban warfare produces rubble, dust, asbestos risk, damaged sewage lines, destroyed fuel tanks, broken solar panels, batteries, medical waste, destroyed vehicles, unexploded ordnance and human remains trapped under debris.In Gaza, the debris problem is now one of the largest environmental and public-health challenges. UNDP reported in December 2025 that about 80 percent of buildings in Gaza had been destroyed, creating an estimated 57.5 million tons of debris. Reuters earlier reported that rubble creates risks from hidden bodies, unexploded bombs and environmental contamination.Debris is therefore not only a reconstruction problem. It is also an exposure problem. If rubble is moved without sorting and testing, contaminants may spread into soil, air and water. If rubble is not moved, roads, hospitals, shelters and water repairs remain blocked.
5. Oil, industrial and coastal pollutionThe most visible historical example of conflict-related coastal pollution in this conflict system is the 2006 Jiyeh Power Plant oil spill in Lebanon. During the 2006 Israel–Hezbollah war, damaged storage tanks at the Jiyeh power plant released heavy fuel oil into the eastern Mediterranean. REMPEC reports that about 30,000 tonnes of heavy fuel oil were released, affecting about one third of Lebanon’s coastline and extending toward the Syrian coast.UNEP’s Lebanon Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment was requested because of concerns about oil-spill damage and possible contamination of land, air, water and biota after the conflict.This case is important because it shows that not all environmental war damage in the region is related to water scarcity or rubble. Attacks on energy infrastructure can create marine pollution, coastal livelihood damage, cleanup hazards, fisheries impacts and long-term ecological monitoring needs.
6. Agriculture, soil and land accessAgriculture and land access are recurrent environmental-health issues. Affected systems include olive groves, orchards, cropland, grazing areas, greenhouses, irrigation networks, terraces and rural roads. Damage can come from direct military action, fires, access restrictions, military zones, unexploded ordnance, settler violence, displacement, fuel shortages, destroyed equipment or loss of markets.In Gaza, repeated wars and the latest large-scale destruction have severely affected cropland, greenhouses, livestock systems and food production. In the West Bank, land access, water infrastructure, settlement expansion, road restrictions and localized violence affect agricultural livelihoods. In southern Lebanon and northern Israel, cross-border fire, shelling, displacement and unexploded ordnance create land-use and livelihood risks.The key point is that environmental damage to agriculture becomes public-health damage through food insecurity, income loss, displacement, stress and reduced resilience.
7. Explosive remnants of war, mines and military debrisExplosive remnants of war are a recurring risk across Gaza, Lebanon, the Golan Heights and border zones. They threaten civilians, children, farmers, reconstruction workers, rubble-clearance teams, utility repair crews and emergency responders.In dense urban areas, unexploded ordnance may be embedded in rubble. In rural or border areas, it can restrict agriculture, grazing, road repair and return. This transforms land into a continuing hazard after the fighting stops.For conference purposes, ERW should be discussed as both a public-health hazard and an environmental-access problem. It affects who can return, which fields can be cultivated, which buildings can be cleared and which infrastructure can be repaired.
8. Health systems, displacement and indirect mortalityThe public-health consequences of recurrent conflict include direct injuries, disability, burns, amputations, psychological trauma, maternal and neonatal risks, interruption of vaccination, chronic disease treatment gaps, infectious disease risk and health-system overload.Gaza is the clearest current example of combined health-system and environmental collapse. Damage to hospitals, water systems, sanitation, housing and waste management has created overlapping risks. But the broader pattern also applies to Lebanon, southern Israel, the West Bank and other affected areas: repeated conflict disrupts routine care, emergency response, rehabilitation, mental-health services and public-health surveillance.Displacement is especially important. It changes exposure: people move into shelters, schools, tents, damaged buildings or host communities. These settings may lack safe water, sanitation, ventilation, heating, cooling, privacy or medical access.
9. Mental health and chronic traumaThis conflict system has produced long-term psychological trauma across multiple populations: Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, Israelis exposed to attacks and displacement, Lebanese communities affected by war, border communities, hostages and their families, detainees and their families, refugees, soldiers, medical workers and children.Mental-health consequences should not be treated as secondary. Recurrent conflict creates chronic fear, grief, interrupted childhood, sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, family separation, loss of home and social fragmentation.For public-health discussion, the important point is that environmental destruction and mental trauma reinforce each other. Loss of home, water, land, school, hospital, livelihood and safety are not separate categories in lived experience.
10. Regional escalation and new environmental risksRecent escalation involving Israel, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen-linked maritime threats and the wider Persian Gulf adds new environmental risks: missile and drone debris, attacks on energy infrastructure, industrial fires, maritime disruption, nuclear and radiological concerns, and cross-border air pollution.CEOBS has highlighted the environmental costs of the escalating Middle East crisis, including Gaza’s environmental collapse and wider regional risks. CEOBS has also discussed emerging environmental consequences of Israel–Iran hostilities, including risks beyond nuclear facilities and the broader environmental implications of military conduct.This suggests that the “Israel and neighbours” case is no longer only about local wars or occupation-related infrastructure damage. It is increasingly part of a wider regional environmental-security system.
11. Evidence limitationsThe evidence base is uneven. Some issues are well documented, such as water and sanitation collapse in Gaza, the Jiyeh oil spill, debris accumulation, and post-conflict assessments in Lebanon. Other issues remain under-measured, especially soil contamination, groundwater contamination, long-term disease outcomes, toxic rubble composition, military residues and cumulative mental-health burden.Speakers should distinguish between:• documented infrastructure damage;• documented water and sanitation collapse;• documented oil pollution events;• documented debris and rubble;• documented displacement and health-system disruption;• plausible but unmeasured contamination;• acute public-health impacts;• long-term disease and mental-health outcomes;• environmental damage caused by one episode and cumulative damage across decades.The most cautious formulation is that recurrent conflict involving Israel and its neighbours has produced severe environmental-health risks through water and sanitation damage, urban destruction, debris, explosive remnants, agricultural disruption, oil and industrial pollution, displacement and health-system stress. Specific claims about toxic exposures require site-level evidence.
12. Relevance for conference discussionThis case is useful precisely because it is not one war. It is a long-duration conflict system in which environmental and public-health damage accumulates through repeated episodes.Its key lessons are:• recurrent conflict can turn temporary infrastructure damage into chronic environmental decline;• water scarcity makes military damage to water systems especially dangerous;• rubble can become a toxic and explosive-risk environment;• coastal infrastructure attacks can create regional marine pollution;• land access is a public-health issue when agriculture, water and safety are affected;• mental-health consequences accumulate across generations;• reconstruction is repeatedly interrupted by renewed escalation;• environmental recovery requires political access, security, monitoring and long-term governance.