Nature" is more than a resource bank whose riches can trigger armed conflict and finance its depredations; it is also a medium through which military and paramilitary violence is conducted. The militarisation of nature is part of a dialectic in which earthy, vibrant matter shapes the contours of conflict and leaves its marks on the bodies of soldiers who are both vectors and victims of military violence. Three case studies identify some of the central bio-physical formations that became entangled with armed conflict in the twentieth century: the mud of the Western Front in the First World War, the deserts of North Africa in the Second World War, and the rainforests of Vietnam. Taken together, these reveal vital connections between the materiality and corporeality of modern war and their continued relevance to its contemporary transformations.
For Neil 1In his too short life, Neil Smith had much to say about both nature and war: from his seminal discussion of "the production of nature" in his first book, Uneven Development (Smith 1984) 2 to his dissections of war in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries in American Empire (Smith 2004)-where he identified the ends of the First and Second World Wars as crucial punctuations in the modern genealogy of globalisation-and its coda, The Endgame of Globalization (Smith 2005), a critique of America's wars conducted in the shadows of 9/11. And yet, surprisingly, he never linked the two. He was of course aware of their connections. He always insisted that the capitalist production of nature, like that of space, was never-could not be-a purely domestic matter, and he emphasised that the modern projects of colonialism and imperialism depended upon often spectacular displays of military violence. But he did not explore those relations in any systematic or substantive fashion.He was not alone. The great Marxist critic Raymond Williams (1976:219) once famously identified "nature" as "perhaps the most complex word in the [English] language". Since he wrote, countless commentators have elaborated on its complexities, but few of them have paused to note that "war" was not one of Williams's keywords (though "violence"-"often now a difficult word" [1983:329]-was). 3 Williams was radicalised by the rise of European fascism; he joined the British Army in 1941 and served as a tank commander during the Second World War. Yet at its end he found the world had turned, and it was for that very reason that he sought to find the terms for a postwar world in which, seemingly, "war" had no place. 4In 1945, after the ending of the wars with Germany and Japan, I was released from the Army to return to Cambridge. University term had already begun, and many