Autumn 2023.

That was when everything began. Two weeks after the first rounds of mutual shelling started on 8 October 2023, waves of forced displacement from the villages along Lebanon’s border strip intensified. The villages bled dry of their residents, and press reports documented thousands of displaced people every day. By the end of the year, dozens of Lebanese villages were deserted. And before the media began framing it as a “war,” more than 90,000 people had already been driven out of their homes and villages by Israeli attacks.

Ruin spread, black as a cloud.

Human displacement and environmental destruction 

It wasn’t until autumn of 2024 that the media began framing events as war. However, from the humanitarian and environmental standpoints, what local and international media had now begun describing as a war was, in fact, a massive expansion in the scale of destruction that had followed exchanges of fire on 8 October 2023.

In practice, what this meant was that the border villages of South Lebanon were no longer alone in their tragedy. The rest of the villages in the governorates of the South, Nabatieh, and the Bekaa joined them, and soon the war reached the heart of the capital, Beirut, and its suburbs, and touched all Lebanese territory. The cloud gradually widened: No longer a phantom haunting the edges, it had become a beast on the attack. Rockets and shells rained down from every direction. Yaroun, Deir Seryan, Maroun al-Ras, Aita al-Shaab, Blida, Mays al-Jabal, Houla, Khiam, and other villages were left on their own, without their people, to face the war and the attempts at forgetting. It was not possible for their names to be dropped from circulation, because land, wherever it faces colonialism, defends itself by itself, with its name, its history, and its memory.

On 27 November 2024, a ceasefire agreement entered into force. Residents returned and saw the destruction up close. During that period (from October 2023 to end November 2024), and before the return of war and displacement on March 2 of the current year (2026), southerners counted the losses and pain they had endured. Data in my report focuses on this first period (8 October 2023 to the end of November 2024) for which more definitive figures and statistics are available. Yet war renewed in the winter of 2026, and this second period (from 2 March 2026), marked by intense suffering and solidarity, is still ongoing. To this day, war continues, against the plains, the valleys, the rivers, the mountains, the trees, and all sources and sustainers of life (even solar panels).

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Greenpeace UK (@greenpeaceuk)

White phosphorus: Fire in the soil

Upon contact with oxygen, white phosphorus ignites. It keeps eating into the skin until it reaches the bone. On October 16, 2023 according to Amnesty International, the Israeli army launched an indiscriminate attack on the border village of Dhayra, after which nine people were taken to hospitals with cases of suffocation. A month later, the village of KfarKila saw the same scene, with the same weapon. White phosphorus seeks no specific target because, quite simply, and in the literal sense of the word, it burns everything.

It does not stop at killing innocent human beings. As UN Habitat details, phosphorus leaves behind scorched soil poisoned with chemical particles that remain active after the bombardment, destroying vegetation cover, causing direct contamination of crops and water sources, accelerating soil erosion, and driving biodiversity into decline. As for the toxic smoke it releases, and the fires that follow it, they act like arms gripping the neck of the ecosystem, slowly choking it. After the repeated white phosphorus attacks, the fields and woodlands in the two villages turned into pale, charred expanses, unable to return to what they had been for many long years. Amnesty again documented phosphorus attacks, internationally prohibited, on the villages of Mays al-Jabal to the east and Aita al-Jabal in the centre. And as happens in most wars of extermination, the perpetrators always seek to push the world into growing accustomed to the crime.

International law bans the use of white phosphorus under Protocol III of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, yet evidence of Israel’s unlawful use of white phosphorus in Lebanon abounds. And while the world went on with its life, the outlines of an ecocide were taking shape in South Lebanon, in parallel with genocide unfolding in Gaza. 

An official report by Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research (CNRS-L) revealed that soil exposed to phosphorus does not undergo blanket contamination so much as an uneven “map of damage” grows within it, forming in hot spots, which dispels the idea of uniform poisoning and points to a more complex and dangerous pattern. Clearly, the figures reveal the degree of deterioration: phosphorus concentrations reached 1,858 parts per million in some sites in South Lebanon, reinforcing the hypothesis that white phosphorus bombs were used. Chromium concentrations exceeded permitted limits in 45% of the samples, and 59% of these exceedances were classified as “very high,” while zinc exceeded allowed levels in 22% of the samples, and copper in 9% of them. Beyond that, lead contamination was detected at a single isolated site in the Bekaa town of Boudai in eastern Lebanon, reaching 230 parts per million.

Figures like these do not point to chemical pollution of an ordinary degree, rather, they indicate a reshaping of the very structure of the land itself, at a deep level.

Woodlands erased with villages and farms causes immediate harm and represents a long term environmental threat

In satellite imagery, the villages have been erased, as if they never stood. Rubble upon rubble. No memories, no stories, no shared life that once bound the residents to the place. Residents following events with a mix of anxiety and pain say that all the roads have been bulldozed, with no trace left of the olive groves that bore witness to the lifetimes of Lebanese villages. Olives are part of South Lebanon’s identity, as the region produces around 38% of the country’s olive harvest overall, more than a third. Yet Israeli attacks have burned and bulldozed no fewer than 65,000 olive trees, including ancient ones.

Losses mount with each passing day. Recovery on the environmental front cannot be equated with infrastructure repair or financial restitution, difficult as those undertakings certainly are. According to recommendations issued in official Lebanese reports, recovery must be approached as a long process, in the face of deep environmental damage that has affected forests, agricultural lands, and existing ecosystems. We are speaking of woodlands fires, chemical pollution that has ravaged the soil, as well as contaminated rubble. All of this is not merely a temporary consequence of war, but it represents a long-term environmental threat.

Ecosystems are far more than just beautiful natural scenery. They form a basic economic infrastructure, tied to agriculture, health, and social stability. For this reason, destruction is not confined to demolished buildings. It goes beyond visible damage to a hidden, long-lasting harm: the disintegration of ecosystems and the loss of their ability to endure. According to Lebanese state estimates, environmental damage has kept on spreading across a wide geographic area, especially during periods of intensified military attacks, with the most severe impacts recorded in South Lebanon and Nabatieh Governorate.

The forestry sector’s disaster extended beyond the burn zone. Basic environmental and economic functions collapsed. The burning of woodlands’ cover led to direct losses in resources, including pine production and firewood generated through traditional forest management, with the cost estimated at around 6 million US dollars. But the deeper loss lies in the destruction of vital environmental services, including soil protection, the preservation of biodiversity, and the regulation of the local climate. In this sense, the affected areas did not lose trees alone, they lost the lines of defense that had protected surrounding communities from erosion, drought, and gradual environmental collapse.

Across coast and hills: A quarter of the land in flames

Let’s not forget that these figures do not constitute a final assessment of the situation. Conditions continue to deteriorate in both the agricultural and livestock sectors, according to official Lebanese statements. The livestock sector has suffered heavy losses, including the death of around 1.8 million heads of poultry and livestock, in addition to more than 29,000 beehives and over 2,000 tons of fish. To date, the cumulative area of agricultural land damaged by Israeli attacks has reached 22.5% of Lebanon’s farmland, nearly a quarter of the country’s agricultural area. This has had a direct and negative impact on Lebanese food security, with the share of emergency food assistance rising from 17% to 24%, leaving one million people living in Lebanon in urgent need of food supplies.

Small-scale farmers are the most affected. The limited plots managed by individuals or families make up around 80% of total agricultural holdings in the South, which has intensified the war’s impact on rural households and the local economy. This trajectory exposes a brutal dimension of colonial warfare: around 78% of farmers in the South are displaced from their villages and barred from returning, leaving only 22% able to remain on their land. The sea too is in mourning: 26 boats lie sunk within it.

Managing the rubble

Rubble is not simply debris. It is not just what remains, but what has been violently undone. The debris left by the war has become something like a “second disaster,” not only because of its sheer scale, but because of its capacity to generate long-term pollution. According to preliminary data, the volume of rubble (up to the end of 2024) was estimated at around 16 million tons, equivalent to roughly 10 million cubic meters of debris weighing down the natural landscape. 

Simply clearing it away is not enough. The debris, and what accumulates above and beneath it, constitutes a direct environmental threat, as it may contain asbestos, lead-based paints, silica dust, and heavy metals. The random dumping of such materials in valleys, forests, and agricultural lands can contaminate soil and water and fragment ecological habitats.

At the time of preparing this report, 40 temporary storage sites had been identified. It must be stressed that any delay in transporting the rubble to final, regulated sites will increase the likelihood of it becoming a permanent part of the landscape. That would amount to yet another disaster. 

Proposals are under discussion at the planning and implementation levels based on a model of “circular recovery,” aimed at turning rubble from an environmental burden into a reusable resource. The Lebanese Ministry of Environment has put forward a plan to recover and recycle around 70% of the debris, with 30% of inert materials to be used in rehabilitating damaged quarries across 17 potential sites for final disposal and restoration (including 4 public and 13 private sites), with priority given to public ones. However, this transition depends on the early sorting of hazardous materials and on organised management that avoids improvised solutions. By early this year, the total cost of debris management was estimated at around 145 million US dollars. 

Regardless of the figures (which will likely far exceed that amount) reconstruction alone, or the mere removal of rubble, will not restore life. What is required is a rethinking and redesign of the relationship between infrastructure and the environment on more sustainable foundations.

During 45 days of war, up to the end of 2024, the war on Lebanon had completely destroyed 21,700 housing units, while another 40,500 units were damaged. Although homes are not environmental structures in themselves, no account of a recovering land is possible without acknowledging those who return to it, and whom it, in turn, receives: people who know the land and are known by it. As the war intensifies, with a sharp rise in figures compared to pre-March 2, 2026, there is still no definitive data on the current number of housing units destroyed in South Lebanon, despite figures circulating in the media, as the war has not ceased.

From an environmental standpoint, the only possible response is continued monitoring, alongside sustained warnings about the ecocidal impact of the ongoing military operations on the ecosystems of southern Lebanon. As for the consequences, they continue to intensify relentlessly, mirroring the grief of residents confronted with the ruins of their lives scattered across their villages.

Stand With Families Forced to Leave Their Homes

Greenpeace MENA is supporting the Lebanese Red Cross in their humanitarian effort.

Donate Today

Zeinab Othman is a Digital Content Editor for Greenpeace Middle East and North Africa (MENA) based in Beirut, Lebanon.

This article is based on official publications issued by governmental institutions and non-governmental organisations. It was originally published by Greenpeace MENA on 19 May 2026.

A dark cloud over Amazon, a billionaire flyby, and the deep arctic explored. Here are some of our favourite images from Greenpeace work around the world this week.

Ireland – Greenpeace International activists flew a ‘Stop the Billionaire Takeoff’ message near Energy Transfer executive chairman Kelcy Warren’s Irish estate Castletown Cox in County Kilkenny to call attention to this Big Oil bully’s widely reported takeover of the nearby Waterford Airport, which he is expanding to allow the use of his private jet.

The Arctic – An underwater ROV (remote operated vehicle) is launched from a research vessel at Bamboo Coral Garden in the Arctic. Greenpeace is currently on expedition in the Arctic and will use underwater cameras to gather and document scientific evidence of the diversity, distribution and connectivity of fauna in Arctic deep-sea ecosystems in the mining area – with particular focus on vulnerable, rare, endemic and undescribed species – in order to trigger international, regional and national conservation protocols.

The Arctic – Images of underwater inhabitants of the Deep Arctic, captured during the current expedition. Pictured in order:
– Male sea spider, Boreonymphon is a genus of marine arthropods known as sea spiders (class Pycnogonida).
– Calanus finmarchicus is a species of copepod crustacean and an essential component of North Atlantic marine ecosystems, serving as a primary food source for fish, seabirds, and whales.
– Crinoid, a deep-sea echinoderm related to sea stars and sea urchins.

U.K. – Greenpeace UK Activists transform a roundabout outside the front entrance of Syngenta’s HQ into a giant hazard symbol carrying the message “Syngenta poisons nature” with an arrow pointing directly at Syngenta’s building. Greenpeace has accused Syngenta of driving wildlife decline and threatening UK food security by making and selling pesticides that poison British wildlife. A recent Greenpeace report found that just one teaspoon of the Syngenta-made pesticide, Hallmark, was enough to kill 13 million bees.

Turkey – Greenpeace Türkiye has published a report on “The hidden costs of coal in Türkiye”. Greenpeace activists showcased the facts revealed in the report and their call for a coal phase-out through a clean graffiti project in various neighbourhoods of Istanbul. Through a graffiti project where pressurised water cleansed specific sections of dirty surfaces to reveal the message, the demand “Phase out coal now!” appeared on the streets of Istanbul’s Kadıköy, Üsküdar and Rumeli Hisarı districts.

Germany – Greenpeace Germany activists protest against Amazon cloud provider AWS’s unscrupulous business dealings with controversial companies at the “AWS Summit” held at the Hamburg exhibition halls, installing a sculpture of a globe controlled by servers in front of the trade fair building, on which installed screens display scenes of human rights violations and environmental destruction that could be caused in a similar manner by business partners of “Amazon Cloud Services.”

Belgium – Greenpeace Belgium activists are taking action during DEME’s annual shareholders meeting in Zwijndrecht. They urge the company and their shareholders to stop investing in deep sea mining.

Greenpeace has been a pioneer of photo activism for more than 50 years, and remains committed to bearing witness and exposing environmental injustice through the images we capture.

To see more Greenpeace photos and videos, visit our Media Library.

From toys to bottles, blankets to clothing, babies are surrounded by plastic. No human born today can fully avoid it, and yet our children may be more vulnerable to its possible impacts. When I made my way into the baby food aisle as a new parent, I was shocked that the image in my head of mini glass bottles and boxes of baby cereal lining shelves had been replaced with rows of plastic pouches. The plastic campaigner in me saw one thing – a mouth full of microplastics.  

Every day, millions of babies around the world happily snack on pureed food packaged in “squeeze and suck” plastic pouches. These colourful and convenient meals-on-the-go dominate the baby food aisle of supermarkets worldwide, and have become a staple for many families. But growing concerns about our daily exposure to plastic and harmful chemicals raise a big question for the global consumer goods companies driving the baby food pouch trend. Could Nestlé and Danone be exposing babies to microplastics and harmful chemicals? Brace yourself, parents: what we reveal in our latest report…sucks.

Nestlé and Danone under the microscope: what our tests found

In Greenpeace International’s new report – Tiny Plastics, Big Problem: The Hidden Health Risks of Plastic Pouches for Baby Food, we dig into the worrying topic of babies’ exposure to microplastics through a popular packaged food. We commissioned an independent lab to investigateNestlé’s Gerberbrand yoghurt-based puree and Danone’s Happy Baby Organicsbrand fruit-based puree packaged in plastic spout pouches. The tests found microplastics present in the food of both products.

In a gram of food – the weight of one little raisin – the Gerber pouches contained up to 54 microplastics on average, and the Happy Baby Organics pouches contained up to 99 microplastics on average. That’s equivalent to up to 270 and up to 495 microplastics per teaspoon, or an estimated total of more than 5,000 particles in each Gerber pouch and more than 11,000 in each Happy Baby Organics pouch. 

The evidence suggests a link between the type of plastic the pouches are lined with – polyethylene, and some of the microplastics found. The results also suggest the presence of a range of chemicals present in both the packaging and the food, including a known endocrine disrupting chemical in the Gerber yoghurt product. 

Gerber and Happy Baby Organics pouches are sold in supermarkets and via online retailers to customers in numerous countries around the world. Parents are putting their trust in these well-known brands to ensure their babies’ first bites of food aren’t contaminated. Unfortunately, this research shows that Nestlé and Danone cannot guarantee that. 

This raises serious health concerns for the babies eating these products. And it casts a shadow over the entire baby food aisle. Plastic-free options are increasingly limited, and certainly not accessible to all parents. 

The plastic food chain: how packaging contamination reaches babies

News headlines warning consumers about product recalls due to plastic contamination have become more common. In a food delivery system so dependent on plastic at every stage of the supply chain, it’s no wonder. Recalls are usually industry-driven. We rely on companies to catch and report suspected or proven problems, and to work with government agencies to notify the public and determine a way forward.

But what happens when the contamination isn’t about a mechanical malfunction or human error? What checks and balances are failing, or worse, don’t exist in the first place? Do these companies already know their products contain microplastics or had they somehow not given any thought to the prospect that eventually their plastic business model would literally crumble apart? 

Nestlé and Danone know they have a plastic problem. They just don’t know how to prioritize people over plastic. And governments aren’t holding them to account. 

A multilayered disaster for babies and the planet

The scientific literature reinforces the warning signs shown by our research. Our report explains how this new study is the latest in a growing body of research investigating baby food packaged in multilayered, flexible plastic pouches and plastic food storage. As new evidence emerges, it consistently points towards microplastic and chemical exposure, and this is true across multiple types of plastic products. 

We already know too well how plastic packaging is weakening the planet’s immune systems – worsening the biodiversity and climate crises across its lifecycle. Plastic packaging represents about 40% of global plastic production and waste. It has caused waste management systems to buckle under immense, sustained pressure. Costing taxpayers, and governments. 

The more plastic companies produce, the more exposed we are. Plastic packaging that makes its way into the environment eventually breaks down into microplastics that circulate through ecosystems, move up food chains, and enter our bodies through air, water or food. 

Whether we are directly or indirectly exposed to microplastics and associated chemicals via packaging, we know that breaking free from the plastic crisis means breaking free from plastic packaging. 

Why system change on plastics is a public health imperative

Together, Nestlé and Danone account for a whopping 40% of the global baby food market, with Nestlé leading the industry overall. With such a huge market reach comes added responsibility to drive the industry in the right direction for the good of its customers and the planet. But these corporate giants are no strangers to plastic pollution-related scandals. 

Nestlé and Danone have repeatedly been two of the top plastic polluters globally, according to community clean-up brand audits by the Break Free from Plastic movement. They pump out upwards of a million tonnes of plastic packaging each year, playing a significant role in creating and sustaining the current plastic crisis.  

Voluntary commitments by Nestlé and Danone haven’t gone far enough to meaningfully reduce their plastic footprints, or drive wider industry shifts towards non-toxic, zero waste models. And efforts to meet external certifications on reducing toxins in products still allow the potential for microplastics and chemicals to slip through the cracks of their product packaging. 

On a planet in environmental and social crisis, meeting lax health and safety legal requirements isn’t going to cut it. And half baked plans and false solutions are an insult to concerned customers. 

Nestlé and Danone must urgently commit to swap pouches for non-toxic, plastic-free reusables and refill systems for baby food. After years of calls to actionto reduce their reliance on plastic packaging, this should serve as a wake-up call that the cost of inaction could be eaten by the next generation.

Governments have more than enough information to apply the precautionary principle, and take immediate action. The burden of proof can’t be on our children, right? Surely we can all agree on that. It’s time to close the policy gaps and work nationally and globally to eliminate harmful plastics and chemicals, and accelerate a shift to healthier and accessible reuse-based systems. Governments must secure a strong and ambitious Global Plastics Treaty that prioritizes human health, cuts global plastic production and consumption, and stops another plastic generation. 

Join me in taking action to stop plastic pollution at the source, globally. Add your name to the petition calling for a strong Global Plastics Treaty that protects the future of biodiversity, the climate and our health. 

Let’s end the age of plastic!

Ask world leaders to support Global Plastic Treaty so that we can finally turn off the tap and end the age of plastic.

Take action

Sarah King is a senior campaign strategist for the Greenpeace Plastic Free Future campaign.

Amsterdam — New research commissioned by Greenpeace International has found microplastics in baby food sold in plastic pouches by two of the world’s largest food companies, Nestlé and Danone, raising urgent concerns about the products marketed for babies.

The report,  Tiny Plastics, Big Problem: The Hidden Risks of Plastic Pouches for Baby Food detailed the laboratory testing of popular baby food brands, Nestlé’s Gerber and Danone’s Happy Baby Organics, where microplastic particles were found in every sample analyzed. The test conducted also suggests that a range of chemicals were present in both the packaging and the food. [1] This suggests that the plastic packaging itself may be a source of contamination, potentially exposing babies to thousands of microscopic plastic fragments with every pouch consumed.

Graham Forbes, Global Plastics Campaign Lead from Greenpeace USA, said:

“This study is a wake-up call for parents everywhere, who trust these brands to put their kids first. Plastic-dependent companies like Nestlé and Danone owe families a clear answer: what are they doing to eliminate microplastics and chemicals from the products they sell to babies?”

Key findings are:

• For every gram of baby food tested, researchers found up to 54 microplastic particles in Gerber pouches and up to 99 particles in Happy Baby Organics pouches, on average. That’s equivalent to as many as 270 (Gerber) and 495 (Happy Baby Organics) microplastics per teaspoon. 
• The study estimated a total of more than 5,000 in each Gerber pouch and more than 11,000 particles in each Happy Baby Organics pouch. 
• The study also identified a range of plastic-associated chemicals present in both the packaging and the food, including the presence of a potential endocrine disruptor in the Gerber samples tested. 
• The study suggests a link between polyethylene, the plastic the pouches are lined with, and some of the microplastics found in the baby food tested. 

Plastic squeeze pouches have rapidly become the dominant packaging format for baby food worldwide, driven by aggressive marketing and a lack of options. It is the fastest-growing form of packaging at 8.18% year on year up to 2031, making up 37.15% of 2025 global market by volume, exceeding all other forms of packaging, including traditional glass jars. Today, millions of these single-use pouches are purchased daily, meaning that millions of babies could be ingesting microplastics alongside their food. Babies may be particularly vulnerable to such exposures due to their rapidly developing organs and higher intake of food relative to body weight.

This trend is part of a broader surge in plastic production and use, much of it driven by major consumer goods companies. Packaging alone accounts for around 40% of global plastic production. One of its fastest-growing segments is flexible, multilayer plastics like baby food pouches and sachets, which are notoriously difficult to recycle and a major source of pollution in some regions.

Nestlé and Danone have repeatedly ranked among the world’s top plastic polluters in global brand audits conducted by the Break Free From Plastic movement.

Greenpeace is calling on Nestlé, Danone, and all baby food producers to urgently investigate their products, prove they are not putting young children at risk of exposure, and commit to phasing out plastic packaging in favor of non-toxic, plastic-free, reusable alternatives.

As governments negotiate the UN Global Plastics Treaty, Greenpeace is demanding negotiators act with urgency to ban these products, reduce plastic production and end uncontrolled and unregulated plastic and chemical contamination that threatens human health.

“Plastic pollution is not just wrecking our environment, it’s entering our bodies, starting from infancy. How our food is packaged is designed for profit, not for people’s health. Cutting plastic production and eliminating harmful chemicals is essential to protect human health, especially the health of our children,” Forbes said.

ENDS

Note: 

[1] The study was conducted by SINTEF Ocean in Norway in 2025 and commissioned by Greenpeace International. It tested three pouches each of two baby food products, Nestlé’s Gerber brand yoghurt puree and Danone’s Happy Baby Organics brand fruit puree. Products were analyzed as sold (not heated).

Photos can be accessed in the Greenpeace Media Library.

Contacts:

Angelica Carballo Pago, Global Plastics Campaign Media Lead, Greenpeace USA, angelica.pago@greenpeace.org , +63 917 1124492

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org