interviewed by Mike Agger on August 7, 1996
"The reaction from the workers at the facility was very aggressive. They sawed through a door to get at the people climbing the tower. We were prepared with people to de-escalate the situation."
Nathan Santry and Beth Fitzgerald are Action Coordinators for Greenpeace International. Recent Greenpeace actions include rappelling down the United Nations building in New York to highlight inadequate policies on global warming and freeing a whale captured by Norwegian mariners. Tripod spoke with Nathan and Beth about how they use "direct non-violent confrontation" to promote awareness of environmental issues.
Tripod: How does direct action fit into the Greenpeace's overall environmental agenda?
Nathan Santry: We have many campaigners who work in communities on specific, local issues. They try to build alliances with people and affect local politics and decision making. We usually do not use direct action until we have exhausted those routes. Hopefully, you will be able to resolve an issue without there being a need for confrontation. When you have a gridlocked situation where people and the environment are being harmed, that is when you need to take direct action. Our actions are what we are known for, but the majority of our work takes place through more conventional channels.
Tripod: What is Greenpeace trying to do when they perform an action like rappelling down the World Trade Center?
Beth Fitzgerald: Actions tend to polarize public opinion. There are people who think what we do is ridiculous, that you should never go outside of the accepted means of raising issues, like writing letters to your Congressman. Those are people who tend to believe that the government does a good job of protecting us.
That is not the point of view of Greenpeace. Very often, government does not react until there is citizen opposition forcing it to react. Greenpeace uses direct action as a way of grabbing the public's attention. Once we have their attention, we try to give them straight information about the issue in question.
Tripod: Let's discuss a recent action you helped coordinate.
BF: Fermi Two is a nuclear facility here in the Great Lakes that almost had a meltdown about thirty years ago. It has had continual problems since then. We have also discovered that the storage containers where they deposit the radioactive waste are leaking. These containers are 150 feet from the shore of Lake Erie!
With the Fermi action, we hung a banner from the cooling tower that said "No Bombs, No Tests, No Nukes" on the 50th anniversary of Nagasaki bombing. We wanted to make it to clear to the public that the civilian nuclear power program is not separate from nuclear weapons production. Also, hanging a banner from the cooling tower showed the complete lack of security around these facilities.
BF: We are a non-violent organization. Our entire philosophy is based on civil disobedience. The reaction from the workers at the facility was very aggressive. They sawed through a door to get at the people climbing the tower.
Tripod: How do you handle potentially violent situations like this one?
BF: The scariest situation we deal with are workers or security personnel who are not aware of the safety measures we have in place to protect our people. For example, they might unknowingly try to slice the anchor line of a climber. We designate roles in our actions for Greenpeace people whose sole job is to talk one-on-one with security personnel and workers. Our people are trained in non-violent de-escalation techniques.
We also frequently call the police on ourselves. This way, we have a third-party authority that will take control of the situation, so that it does not develop into Greenpeace people vs. workers. The police often play the role of negotiator and ensure the safety of everyone.
NS: When you are in the role of the peacekeeper, what you look for are those people who are trying to rile up the crowd or incite a situation. The best way to stop something is to introduce an element of direct witness to it. If two people are about to scuffle and you step between them in a calm manner, it stops a fight from happening. Fast movement, people running, tends to help a situation get out of hand. Basically, when there is a slow moving activity, people do not respond excitedly to it.
BF: It takes a lot of personal conviction. The idea of non-violent direct action comes from the idea of bearing witness. You become so morally outraged over the need for change in a particular situation that you want to participate in a more active level. There is a shared sense of urgency among Greenpeace people about the environmental situation we are facing. We don't think that following the status quo is going to get us where we need to be, environmentally, in time.
Tripod: Do you know going into these actions that there is a good chance of being arrested?
NS: Our focus is never to break the law for the sake of breaking the law. I know that there are people who love the thrill of being arrested. I take breaking the law very seriously. It sucks to be put into jail overnight or even for a couple of hours. It is not fun, and it is not that interesting. You should be intelligent and know what your goals are when you do an action. If it comes to a point where you risk arrest, then you might try it. Usually, you do not have to risk arrest; you just have to be more creative in how to conceive of an action that will draw attention to an issue.
BF: Before we do an action, we want to have as much information as possible about potential consequences to us as individuals and to the organization. Legally, what is this going to mean to me, the movement, to Greenpeace? Nobody in Greenpeace is ever required to do anything illegal, it is a personal decision. A lot of us want to put our bodies on the line, we want our actions to speak for our words.
NS: In a lot of cases, the authorities do not want to arrest you even if you have broken a law. An industry knows that it will get more attention from a trial rather than if they just let you go. Again, we don't ask to be arrested to make a point, we try and make the action speak for itself.
Tripod: What is the hallmark of a successful direct action?
BF: A successful direct action is one that creates cognitive dissonance. We want our actions to jar you into thinking about an issue in a different way than you might have before. One of my favorite actions of all time happened in Czechoslovakia. To protest against censorship, a group of people went out on the streets and started handing out blank sheets of paper. They were arrested for not processing their "literature" through the appropriate authorities. These were blank pieces of paper! These actions creates confusion, because the show how a situation no longer makes any sense. It provokes people to respond.
We also do very serious actions. I am sure you are familiar with the situation in Nigeria with Shell Oil. A colleague of ours in the action department hung from a Shell sign in San Francisco with a bag over his head. A very simple activity, yet a very powerful image. These kinds of acts, help people connect the dots in the world.
Tripod: Many of your actions are dependent upon the media taking notice. Do they often ignore the things you do?
BF: On the fifth anniversary of the Chernobyl accident, Greenpeace did an action in Czechoslovakia. We placed crosses on a field with five cooling towers in a background. In the morning edition of the "Chicago Tribune" there was a photo showing a man walking in these crosses with the cooling towers in the background. In the afternoon edition of that same paper, they had altered the photo so that the cooling towers where whited out. The image just looked like a man walking in a field of crosses.
The question in my mind was: why is the "Chicago Tribune" altering the information that it is bringing to the public? It turned out that one of the ombudsman for the "Chicago Tribune" is also on the Board of Directors for Commonwealth Edison which owns thirteen nuclear plants in Illinois. There is a link there. When you talk about U.S. media covering issues, you have to look a little bit deeper and realize that media is not unbiased. The media is a corporation.
This presents a challenge for Greenpeace, because we are an organization that wants to use every avenue to create more awareness about environmental issues. If we can't trust that the media is going to report these things in an unbiased way, we have to find alternative means. These might be the Internet, or alternative publications, radio broadcasts, and skywriting.
NS: I am working with creative uses of video projection and even the possibility of harnessing satellite technology.
Tripod: How do advise people to get involved with your direct actions?
NS: I think people who want to work with us often wonder what they can do. What would I say to them is to see if there is a regional Greenpeace office near them. My work-related experience coming out of college was in video work. If I wasn't already working for Greenpeace, I might call one of the offices and say: "Hey, I am a videographer, and I am willing to donate my time." I am looking for people to call me up and say, "I am a welder, I am a diver, I am a writer and I would like to help you out." People should recognize that they can call us on the phone and volunteer their skills.
Nathan Santry works out of the Greenpeace office in Washington D.C. His phone number is (202) 319-2539.
