aggravating the climate crisis resulting from the Gaza war, in light of the International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion of 23 July 2025 on States' obligations concerning climate change. Adopting a climate change law perspective, rather than the law of armed conflict, the study analyzes the climate-related consequences of warfare through the lens of States' climate obligations. These consequences include direct greenhouse gas emissions from military operations, emissions associated with the supply chain and transportation of weapons and fuel, disruption of energy infrastructure, forced reliance on fossil fuels, debris and waste management, and emissions generated during post-war reconstruction. The Advisory Opinion characterizes climate obligations as erga omnes obligations grounded in the principle of due diligence and rejects the argument that the principle of lex specialis precludes the application of general climate obligations during armed conflict. Accordingly, States are required to act on the basis of the best available scientific evidence and the precautionary principle and to make their best possible efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Consequently, where conduct or omissions attributable to the Israeli regime result in breaches of these obligations, particularly those relating to domestic mitigation measures, transparency, and reporting, international responsibility may arise in the form of cessation, guarantees of non-repetition, and, where the remaining conditions of State responsibility, including causation, are established, reparation.