TEHRAN – Environmental diplomacy can become an instrument of peace diplomacy, while the relationship between biodiversity, peace, and security should be viewed as a two-way relationship, Shina Ansari, the head of the Department of Environment, has said.
Speaking on Friday at a specialized panel titled “Biodiversity and Peace: Protecting the Environment During Armed Conflicts” at the 17th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP17) in Yerevan, Ansari said the link between biodiversity and peace was not merely an ethical or political issue, but a fundamental concern in environmental governance, international law, and human security.
Under the Convention on Biological Diversity, she said, the main drivers of biodiversity loss are generally understood to include land-use change, habitat destruction, pollution, unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, and climate change.
“However, there is another factor that deserves far greater attention in this equation: the breakdown of peace and the outbreak of armed conflicts,” she said.
War can trigger several drivers of biodiversity loss simultaneously and with devastating intensity. Its consequences range from the direct destruction of habitats and widespread fires to soil and water contamination, the release of hazardous substances, human displacement, disruption of protected-area management, and the weakening of national capacities to monitor and protect nature.
Ansari said Iran was speaking about these realities not merely in theoretical terms, but on the basis of direct experience, having witnessed the consequences of such circumstances in recent years.
During the 12-day war in 2025, several protected areas in Iran were also affected by attacks and the consequences of the fighting. According to assessments, 13 protected areas and thousands of hectares of natural land, particularly across the Zagros Mountains, sustained damage and were affected by fires.
However, the actual scale of the damage goes far beyond the number of hectares burned or destroyed, she said.
The environmental vulnerability of the Persian Gulf was again exposed during what Ansari described as the recent war of aggression by the United States and Israel against Iran. Damage to oil and gas facilities, fires, and pollutant emissions raised concerns about the risks of pollution to the region’s ecosystems.
The Persian Gulf is a semi-enclosed, shallow, and highly environmentally sensitive body of water. Its coral reefs, mangrove forests, coastal habitats, and rich marine biodiversity are of considerable ecological value. These ecosystems are also directly linked to food security and the livelihoods of millions of people across the region.
Under such circumstances, no pollution incident can be regarded as merely a local problem, Ansari said. Pollutants can travel through marine currents, enter the food chain, and affect habitats far from the original source of contamination.
From this perspective, she said, condemning acts of aggression and holding those responsible accountable should extend beyond the traditional dimensions of international peace and security.
Assessments of the consequences of armed conflicts must therefore adopt an approach that examines environmental damage independently, scientifically, and over the long term. Such assessments should go beyond physical destruction to cover biodiversity loss, habitat degradation, damage to ecosystem services, soil and water pollution, and harm to genetic resources.
The international community must establish more effective mechanisms for monitoring, documenting, assessing, and compensating for environmental damage caused by armed conflicts, she added.
Countries across West Asia and Southwest Asia face mounting environmental pressures, including climate change, water scarcity, desertification, dwindling natural resources, and growing stress on ecosystems, while continuing to grapple with persistent security crises.
In these circumstances, war can intensify environmental crises and increase the vulnerability of both communities and ecosystems.
“The relationship between biodiversity, peace, and security should therefore be understood as a two-way relationship,” Ansari said. “Peace is essential for nature, while effective and responsible nature conservation can, in turn, contribute to strengthening peace.”
Cooperation on shared rivers, wetlands, seas, migratory species, and genetic resources can create valuable opportunities for dialogue, confidence-building, and closer collaboration among countries.
“I believe that it is precisely at this point that environmental diplomacy can become an instrument of peace diplomacy,” she said.
“Peace is more than the absence of war; it is an essential condition for protecting life. And protecting biodiversity means protecting life itself.”
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: tehrantimes.com
