Greenpeace has come a long way since the Rainbow Warrior, the
retrofitted trawler used to challenge nuclear testing and whaling, was enough of
a threat that the French government dispatched commandoes to sink her in
1985.
On February 13th, Greenpeace International announced that was
hiring ForestEthics founder Tzeporah Berman as director of its global climate
and energy campaign. The move has provoked intense outrage among many Greenpeace
supporters, staff and activists. The conflict raging within Greenpeace has the
potential to be an important first step in addressing two heretofore taboo
subjects in the environmental movement: the corrupting influence of corporate
cash and the absence of democratic structures.
The announcement marked an acceleration of a long-term drift
away from Greenpeace's origins in direct action environmental and anti-war work.
Back in 2007, Greenpeace lauded Coca-Cola for its "commitment to use
climate-friendly coolers and vending machines." (The same year, campaigns
against Coke's complicity in paramilitary assassination of union leaders in
Colombia were in full swing, while a year earlier, the government of Kerala had
banned Coca-Cola after a revolt over overuse and pollution of groundwater.)
If the Coke deal was Greenpeace testing the waters of corporate
collaboration, hiring Berman is Greenpeace jumping in.
The hire marks a full-circle return for Berman, who rose to
prominence within Greenpeace but left in 2000 to found ForestEthics, where she
broke new ground in the "collaborative approach" to conservation. According to
Berman's ethos, "the notion of activists vs. corporations, of good vs. evil, no
longer applies... It's about creating dialogue, and finding the solutions that
will be mutually beneficial to all."
While heading up ForestEthics, Berman undertook a series of
collaborations with companies like Home Depot, Dell, Staples and most recently
General Electric. Immediately before being hired by Greenpeace, Berman headed
PowerUp Canada, an initiative funded mostly by the Tides and Ivey Foundations
that pushed the privatization of British Columbia's rivers in the name of green
energy. She has since backed away from the fruits of her efforts, claiming she
does not support the privatization of "all" rivers in BC.
Grassroots environmentalists in Canada were furious at Berman
long before she took the Greenpeace job, starting with the elimination of public
oversight during her stint as lead negotiator of the Great Bear Rainforest deal.
(In the deal that was finally signed, only 32 per cent of the rainforest was
protected.)
Berman's return to Greenpeace as it approaches its 40th year of
existence has stoked the ire of the organization's supporters to white-hot
levels.
In an email that has made the rounds of Canadian environmental
lists, Greenpeace International co-founder Rex Weyler called Berman's hire "an
all-out betrayal of environmentalism, of the groups and activists who built the
environmental movement in Canada and in the world, and a betrayal of the Earth
itself."
70 people have signed a statement calling on Greenpeace to
rescind Berman's hire and "renounce collaboration and partnership with
destructive corporations".
Greenpeace staffers and activists in Canada -- where Berman is
well-known, and where Greenpeace has a high-profile anti-tar sands campaign
underway -- have privately expressed a mix of bafflement and rage at the
decision.
One anonymous "Greenpeace activist or staff" remarked in
testimony posted to www.SaveGreenpeace.org: "Greenpeace actually started the
Kyoto Plus campaign to battle Power Up, the organization that Tzeporah started.
And now they're hiring her. The hypocrisy blows my mind. It's astonishing. It's
like they just hired the devil. No one will take us seriously... with decisions
like this."
Greenpeace's decision comes at a point when questions about
Environmental organizations lack of democracy or accountability, and their
corresponding closeness with corporations involved in environmental destruction,
are looming larger than ever.
A recent report in The Nation ends with a 30-year veteran of the
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) stating outright: "We're close to a
civil war in the environmental movement. For too long, all the oxygen in the
room has been sucked out by this beast of these insider groups, who achieve
almost nothing.... We need to create new organizations that represent the
fundamentals of environmentalism and have real goals."
The report, whose author was subsequently interviewed on
Democracy Now!, raises issues that are echoed in the anonymous testimonies of
disgruntled Greenpeacers. Phrases like "disenfranchised," "no consultation," "no
transparency," "more concerned with getting a 'seat at the table,'" point
repeatedly to the same pair of problems: addiction to corporate and foundation
cash and a total lack of democracy.
While the debate rages inside Greenpeace, early reports seem to
indicate that many on the inside are channeling their frustration at the lack of
consultation and their own disempowerment into rage against the small number of
people willing to publicly oppose the Berman hire and discuss her record.
The frustration is understandable, but if the goal is a strong,
democratic environmental movement, there are much better targets for their
rage.
The overreach of Greenpeace's turn towards corporate
collaboration and the ensuing grassroots backlash affords the rarest of moments:
an opportunity to articulate and push for demands that normally bounce
harmlessly off of the bureaucratic carapace of big organizations like
Greenpeace.
It's an opportunity to demand an end to corporate collaboration,
but it's also an opportunity to demand democratic accountability to a supporting
membership that is there because of the organization's forty years of direct
action. Small-scale financial supporters, volunteer activists and staff alike
have no formal say in Greenpeace's strategic direction. Nearly all of their
complaints emanate from the frustration created by that contradiction.
At a moment where tensions are at their highest, the irony of an
NRDC functionary describing "civil war" and calling for "new organizations that
represent the fundamentals of environmentalism and have real goals" while
Greenpeacers seethe, lash out at those pointing to Berman's record, or quit,
should not be lost on anyone.
Greenpeace International's head office has raised the stakes. If
the resistance to Berman's hire is broken, the descent of the organization will
be far swifter than the Coked-up years leading to its fortieth birthday. If the
resistance continues to grow and spreads to supporters of other unaccountable,
corporate-partnered big greens, then we'll win with Greenpeace or without
it.
If Greenpeace's transformation into another public relations
contractor for corporations and foundations is allowed to continue, everyone
loses.
Corporate collaboration will never do more than slightly curtail
environmental destruction. In many cases, the results of collaboration have been
disastrous. The only things that can stop it are organizations rooted in
communities and grassroots movements that are immune to "leaders" selling them
out for money and ego.
If that's what folks working with and supporting Greenpeace
want, they won't get a better shot at it than this one.
Tzeporah Berman is slated to start work in April.
Dru Oja Jay is co-author of the report Offsetting Resistance: The effects of
foundation funding from the Great Bear Rainforest to the Athabasca River. He
is a member of the editorial collective of the Dominion, and lives in Montreal.
Counterpunch