This week, a jury in North Dakota issued a landmark ruling, ordering the environmental hate group Greenpeace to pay $660 million in damages for malicious interference with the Dakota Access Pipeline. This was no ordinary protest – it was a concerted, coordinated campaign of defamation and destruction, designed to sabotage the development of critical energy infrastructure. The fine, while substantial, barely scratches the surface of the damage Greenpeace has inflicted on countless communities across the globe, especially in Africa.
At the African Energy Chamber (AEC), we believe Greenpeace’s actions in Africa deserve equal, if not greater, scrutiny. For years, Greenpeace has actively sought to obstruct energy projects across the continent, particularly in Uganda, South Africa and Mozambique – countries where energy development is crucial to fighting poverty and unlocking economic potential. Greenpeace’s interference in these nations has caused real, measurable harm to local communities, delaying projects that would bring much-needed energy access to millions. The $660 million fine imposed in the U.S. should be viewed as just the beginning of the reckoning that Greenpeace faces.
Greenpeace’s methods go beyond simple protest – they involve a calculated strategy of misinformation, disruption and direct interference with energy infrastructure. In Africa, their disruptive activities continue to delay funding for critical energy projects like the East African Crude Oil Pipeline and Mozambique LNG development, which are crucial for delivering much-needed access to refined petroleum products. They have actively blocked seismic surveys in South Africa and fought against petroleum development in Namibia, essential for unlocking local economic growth, job creation and energy security in both countries. By consistently attacking companies operating across Africa, Greenpeace is worsening energy poverty on the continent while enjoying the comforts of energy-sufficient societies in Europe and America. Their actions have not only harmed businesses, but obstructed the development of energy resources that could significantly improve the living standards of millions of Africans.
Let’s be clear: while Greenpeace has the right to voice concerns, they do not have the right to destroy property, block infrastructure and spread falsehoods under the guise of free speech. Their approach is not about finding solutions – it’s about stopping anything that doesn’t align with their narrow agenda. This is not a battle for the planet; it is a battle against progress, against prosperity and against the future of the African people.
Greenpeace’s opposition to energy development in Africa completely disregards the reality that energy access is essential for the continent’s progress. While these organizations claim to defend the environment, their actions ignore the broader socioeconomic needs of the countries they target. Energy companies, despite their focus on profit, are vital to the economic and social development of nations, particularly in Africa, where energy access is a fundamental requirement for growth. Their involvement in energy projects provides not just power, but opportunities for job creation, improved living standards and long-term sustainability. Greenpeace’s interference obstructs these opportunities, keeping millions of Africans trapped in energy poverty. Worse, by delaying or blocking energy projects, Greenpeace’s actions disrupt the supply of vital energy resources, which ultimately leads to higher fuel prices globally, making it more difficult for people in developing countries to access affordable energy.
The ruling in North Dakota should set a precedent for holding Greenpeace accountable on a global scale. If their disruptive tactics continue unchecked, it’s time for Africa to take a stand and pursue legal action against Greenpeace in our own courts. The AEC has experienced firsthand the tactics these groups employ, such as when they hired protectors to disrupt operations at the AEC offices and during African Energy Week, where they attempted to interfere with crucial energy discussions. These efforts undermine the Chamber’s core mission to combat energy poverty, drive sustainable development and secure access to reliable energy for communities across Africa.
The damage they’ve caused to Mozambique’s energy sector, Uganda’s oil development and South Africa’s energy projects must not be overlooked. Greenpeace’s interference has resulted in lost opportunities and hindered critical infrastructure development – an affront to millions of people who are desperately in need of reliable energy. This is not activism; this is sabotage.
“Demonizing energy companies is not a constructive way forward, and ignoring the essential role that carbon-based fuels play in today’s society distorts the public debate,” stated NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the AEC. “Oil and gas companies are not autocratic regimes focused on oppressing people and stealing their resources. They are businesses that, yes, are focused on profit, but are also dedicated to ensuring their own sustainability. In practical terms, this means these companies adapt to the needs of the economies in which they operate.”
“Greenpeace and their allies disrupting oil and gas company activities will not have a significant impact on carbon emissions, but it may lead to higher fuel prices in the long run. Bringing together energy companies, governments and civil society groups to find practical solutions will achieve far more. That is the goal we should be working towards,” Ayuk concluded.
Greenpeace’s defeat in North Dakota should serve as a wake-up call to the international community. Their actions have long been allowed to go unchecked, but the time for their impunity is over. The professional protest industry — led by Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Just Stop Oil, Extinction Rebellion and others – must be made to answer for their reckless, irresponsible behavior.
The Chamber calls for Africans to pursue legal action against Greenpeace for their harmful actions on the continent. The $660 million fine in North Dakota is a good start, but the real costs of Greenpeace’s campaign against African energy development are much higher. We cannot allow these organizations to continue blocking critical projects that have the potential to uplift entire nations. Africa’s energy future should not be held hostage by those who refuse to understand our realities.
