Greenpeace: A Movement at a Crossroads

⏱️ 14 min read            

Greenpeace—you’ve perhaps have seen some of their daring ship confrontations, activists chaining themselves to whaling vessels, their bold campaigns against corporate polluters. Imagine a world without them.

That reality could be coming. Greenpeace, the legendary environmental group that fought to save the whales, now finds itself fighting for survival. 

A lawsuit in North Dakota threatens to shut down its U.S. operations, with a jury verdict looming. How did it come to this? And what would Greenpeace’s collapse mean for the future of environmental activism?

Welcome to That's Life, I Swear. This podcast is about life's happenings in this world that conjure up such words as intriguing, frightening, life-changing, inspiring, and more. I'm Rick Barron your host. 

That said, here's the rest of this story 

For over five decades, Greenpeace has captured global attention through bold environmental activism. From confronting whaling vessels in remote waters to unfurling banners from iconic landmarks and occupying drilling platforms, the organization has become synonymous with dramatic environmental protest. Its cultural impact even reached mainstream television when a character in "Seinfeld" joined Greenpeace to impress a romantic interest.

Today, however, this storied organization faces an existential threat. A pending lawsuit demands $300 million in damages—a sum that could potentially shutter Greenpeace's American operations. 

The legal battle stems from events a decade ago at the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, where protests erupted against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Energy Transfer, the pipeline's owner, alleges that Greenpeace facilitated illegal activities and orchestrated a damaging publicity campaign that financially harmed the company.

Greenpeace contends its involvement was minimal and peaceful, merely supporting an Indigenous-led movement. The organization argues that the lawsuit represents a broader attack on free expression, designed to intimidate environmental activists through the threat of costly litigation.

This legal challenge comes during a particularly difficult period for environmental advocacy. Climate disasters are intensifying, while the current administration has begun dismantling environmental protections established over generations. Many landmark environmental achievements now hang in the balance.

The International Center for Not-for-Profit Law has tracked a wave of bills proposed since 2017 that toughen penalties against protesters. Many became law in the wake of the demonstrations against the pipeline at the center of the Greenpeace case (the Dakota Access Pipeline) and also the Black Lives Matter movement, which rose to prominence after the murder of George Floyd in 2020 by a police officer in Minnesota. More recently, the Trump administration has moved to deport international students who protested the war in Gaza.

Sushma Raman, who leads Greenpeace USA on an interim basis, described the North Dakota trial as "a critical test of the future of the First Amendment."

Energy Transfer, a major player in the pipeline industry, maintains that the lawsuit addresses illegal behavior rather than protected speech. "It is about them not following the law," the company stated.

Origins and Evolution

Established in Vancouver in 1971, Greenpeace initially excelled at creating a memorable identity through its distinctive name and high-risk tactics. Throughout its history, the organization has weathered internal conflicts, strategic errors, legal challenges, and questions about maintaining relevance as it institutionalized.

The broader environmental movement has expanded but struggles to capture attention in today's fragmented media landscape. Climate change advocacy presents particular challenges, as its impacts can seem more abstract than traditional environmental campaigns targeting specific locations or practices.

"What they made their name on was the media spectacle, especially the ability to conduct a high-profile action that requires incredible tactical organization," explained Frank Zelko, who teaches history at the University of Hawaii at Mānoa and authored "Make It a Green Peace! The Rise of Countercultural Environmentalism." This approach became "less efficacious" as media competition intensified and dramatic imagery proliferated.

Greenpeace emerged from Sierra Club circles, founded on ecological principles and opposition to militarism. Balancing daring protest actions with operating as a professional global network has always required careful navigation.

After leadership disputes in the late 1970s, Greenpeace International was established in the Netherlands as a coordinating body for independent national offices, including Greenpeace USA.

The American branch's activities are central to the current lawsuit. Greenpeace International claims minimal involvement, limited to signing a single open letter. The international organization has filed a countersuit in the Netherlands, seeking to recover legal expenses under European anti-harassment laws.

Leadership turmoil has accompanied the legal challenges. In early 2023, Greenpeace USA celebrated appointing Ebony Twilley Martin as its sole executive director—reportedly the first Black woman to solely lead a major American environmental organization. However, she departed after just 16 months, with sources indicating disagreements over potential settlement with Energy Transfer contributed to her exit.

Revolutionary Beginnings

Greenpeace emerged during a tumultuous era marked by the Vietnam War, nuclear proliferation, and visible environmental degradation. Rex Weyler, now 77, documented this history in his 2004 book "Greenpeace: How a Group of Ecologists, Journalists and Visionaries Changed the World."

In Vancouver, Weyler connected with journalist Bob Hunter and Quaker activists Dorothy and Irving Stowe, who had left the United States over opposition to war taxation and weapons testing. These individuals sought to create an ecology movement employing nonviolent direct action, inspired by figures like Mohandas K. Gandhi and American civil rights activists.

The group initially formed as a Sierra Club offshoot after disagreements over protest strategies.

Their inaugural campaign targeted U.S. nuclear testing on Amchitka, an Alaskan island. The Sierra Club's San Francisco headquarters had not approved their proposal to sail a protest vessel to the test site, though the idea had already appeared in The Vancouver Sun.

"The Sierra Club was not amused when they saw this story, because they said, 'You know, a lot of our members are just tree-huggers, and they don't care about nuclear disarmament,'" recalled Robert Stowe, son of Dorothy and Irving and a behavioral neurologist. "Had the Sierra Club agreed to do this, Greenpeace could probably never have been founded."

The name "Greenpeace" originated spontaneously during a planning session when Irving Stowe said "peace" and fellow activist Bill Darnell responded, "Make it a green peace."

They emblazoned "Greenpeace" on their fishing vessel. Irving Stowe organized a fundraising concert featuring Joni Mitchell, James Taylor, and Phil Ochs.

The boat departed in September 1971 but was intercepted by the Coast Guard before reaching Amchitka. Nevertheless, the attempt generated substantial media coverage—establishing what would become the organization's trademark strategy.

The Whale Campaign

Greenpeace's subsequent initiative became perhaps its most recognizable: protecting whales from commercial hunting.

The concept originated with Paul Spong, a researcher who argued that highly intelligent whales faced extinction from hunting. This led to well-documented, dramatic sailing expeditions confronting Soviet whaling vessels.

A global moratorium on commercial whaling has been in effect since 1986—a victory claimed by Greenpeace and other advocacy groups.

The organization also campaigned against seal hunting in northern Canada, a controversial effort that alienated many residents, including Indigenous communities. Greenpeace Canada apologized to Inuit people in 2014 for the campaign's impacts, clarifying that it did not oppose small-scale subsistence hunting.

The Rainbow Warrior, a key vessel in anti-whaling efforts, joined the fleet in 1978. While protesting French nuclear testing in 1985, the ship was bombed by French intelligence agents, killing photographer Fernando Pereira and triggering international condemnation.

France later apologized and paid $8 million in damages to Greenpeace, with a separate settlement for Pereira's family.

A new Rainbow Warrior continues operating today as one of three Greenpeace vessels. It is currently sailing near the Marshall Islands to "elevate calls for nuclear and climate justice" and support research on past nuclear testing effects.

Contemporary Challenges

By the 1990s, Greenpeace's attention-grabbing environmentalism inspired a new generation, including Valentina Stackl, 39, who first learned about its campaigns as a child in Europe. She worked with Greenpeace USA from 2019 to 2023.

"The idea of Greenpeace ships, and save the whales and hanging off a bridge or something like that was truly magical," she reflected. "And on the best days Greenpeace really was like that. Of course, there's also the slog of the day-to-day that is less sparkly."

Fundraising remains a persistent concern: Greenpeace USA relies primarily on individual donations, which can fluctuate, though tax filings indicate stable revenue in recent years.

The organization's focus has shifted toward climate issues and environmental justice—recognizing that environmental hazards disproportionately affect marginalized communities. The historically white and male-dominated group has worked to collaborate more effectively with diverse partners while addressing tensions with Indigenous communities over past campaigns and missteps.

One significant error occurred in Peru in 2014, when Greenpeace Germany activists damaged the ancient Nazca lines while placing a renewable energy message in the restricted area. Peru's cultural minister condemned it as an act of "stupidity" that had "co-opted part of the identity of our heritage."

The organization apologized, and the incident prompted Greenpeace USA to establish formal policies regarding Indigenous community engagement. According to campaigns director Rolf Skar, Greenpeace now refrains from involvement in Indigenous-led struggles unless they are specifically invited.

This policy featured prominently in the North Dakota trial, with Greenpeace arguing it offered support at the Dakota Access Pipeline protests only after Indigenous leaders requested assistance, without seeking a leading role.

On Monday, March 17, 2025, in a courtroom in Mandan, North Dakota, jurors heard closing arguments before deliberating on Greenpeace's future.

As this podcast episode was going to production the verdict came down against Greenpeace. 

On March 19, 2025, a North Dakota jury ordered Greenpeace to pay the Texas-based pipeline company Energy Transfer more than $660 Million

The environmental group had said the lawsuit, over its role in a protest movement, could mean an end to its operations in the United States. Greenpeace said it would appeal. The group has maintained that it played only a minor part in demonstrations led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. It has portrayed the lawsuit as an attempt to stifle oil-industry critics.

Stay tuned.

What can we learn from this story? What's the takeaway?

Activist organizations can face significant legal and financial consequences when opposing large corporations, especially in high-stakes industries like oil and energy. 

Greenpeace’s decision to appeal highlights how legal battles can extend over time, and outcomes can change through the court system.

The case might discourage other activist groups from engaging in similar protests, fearing legal retaliation. It also emphasizes the need for careful strategy and legal preparedness in advocacy movements.

Well, there you go, my friends; that's life, I swear

For further information regarding the material covered in this episode, I invite you to visit my website, which you can find on Apple Podcasts for show notes and the episode transcript.

As always, I thank you for the privilege of you listening and your interest. 

Be sure to subscribe here or wherever you get your podcast so you don't miss an episode. 

And we’ll see you soon.