(Not) all is fair in love and war: Norbert Elias’s theory of civilisation, military violence, and the protection of the environment in war

Military force has historically shaped human societies and their environments, often leaving profound and lasting ecological impacts. The environmental consequences of military activities – even in peacetime – can endure for generations. This paper examines the environmental dimensions of warfare in relation to the development of rules and regulations under international humanitarian law that constrain violence against the natural environment during war and armed conflict. We situate military practices and legal constraints within Norbert Elias’s framework of the civilising process and explore the intertwined processes of de‑civilisation and civilisation inherent in modern warfare. We argue that acts of ecocide represent, on one hand, a regression into unrestrained, primal destruction that de-civilises humanity’s relationship with extra‑human nature. On the other hand, particularly since the Second World War, humankind has been engaged in a process that establishes boundaries rendering environmental destruction by the military both definable and recognisable as a transgression. In this way, such destruction is neither ignored nor left unacknowledged; it is no longer regarded as self‑evident or inevitable, nor defined as a necessary evil or mere ‘collateral damage’ but rather understood and treated as a ‘wrongful act’. This evolution signals an expansion of ethical and legal boundaries consistent with Elias’s insights into the codification of restraint in human behaviour.