By Emiliano Rodriguez Nuesch and María Morena Vicente

How can you ensure that a pressing environmental issue no longer flies under the radar? What does it take to make the world pay attention to the escalating climate crisis?

Climate sabotage refers to deliberate actions aimed at disrupting or dismantling infrastructure that is seen as harmful to the environment. These acts of direct action are intended to create immediate obstacles for projects or systems that contribute to climate change, such as fossil fuel extraction, deforestation, or industrial pollution.

This tactic emerges when traditional methods of advocacy—like protests, petitions, or legal challenges—fail to effect change in the face of urgent threats to the environment. Climate sabotage forces the conversation into the spotlight, making it impossible to ignore the gravity of the situation, where traditional methods have failed.

Why does it happen? Often, it’s born out of deep frustration and a sense of desperation. When people feel that time is running out and that their voices aren’t being heard, they may turn to more radical means to defend the planet. Emotions play a critical role here, acting as a catalyst for these disruptive actions, fueled by a sense of urgency and moral justification. The urgency of the climate crisis, coupled with a moral imperative to protect the Earth, drives individuals to take bold, sometimes drastic, measures.

Anger at perceived injustices, such as the continued destruction of ecosystems or the unchecked power of corporations profiting from environmental degradation, can push individuals toward direct action. Climate sabotage is, at its core, a response to the feeling that the stakes are too high and the consequences of inaction too severe. Andreas Malm, author of How to Blow Up a Pipeline, argues that the climate struggle requires a diversity of tactics, including property destruction.

In the words of French climate activist Lena Lazare, this is not a new strategy, "Sabotage has been part of the repertoire of workers’ action modes for over a hundred years. It’s a link that also connects us to the social movement. Recently, unions also cut electricity in some places of power against pension reform. These actions are legitimate and give us strength."

The big paradox

Sabotage as a strategy presents a significant contradiction. On one hand, it effectively draws attention to urgent issues that might otherwise be ignored; on the other, it comes with significant costs and consequences.

The disruptive nature of sabotage often leads to demonization of those involved, who are portrayed as criminals or extremists rather than activists fighting for a cause.

While sabotage can amplify a message, it also risks alienating the public and authorities, complicating the broader movement for change.

Let’s see some examples:

Environmental groups, like Greenpeace, have employed sabotage as a direct action strategy to prevent environmentally destructive activities such as whaling and nuclear testing. By physically intervening, such as placing boats between whalers and their targets or disrupting nuclear test sites, they aim to halt these harmful practices immediately.

These actions also serve a broader purpose: to raise public awareness, generate media attention, and pressure governments and organizations to change their policies.

Led by 26-year-old former physics student Lena Lazare, “Les Soulèvements de la Terre” (Earth Uprisings) is a French environmental group that employs sabotage against projects like mega-basins, which they view as environmentally harmful.

For this group, these actions are a way of "disarming" harmful infrastructure, aligning with a broader trend among radical European climate groups targeting what they believe contributes to global warming.

In 2015, 1,500 activists from the German group Ende Gelände took part in a daring act of civil disobedience to shut down Europe's largest source of CO2 emissions. Around 1,000 people successfully entered the coal mine, bringing all the diggers in the pit to a standstill.

In 2019 groups like Fridays for Future, Extinction Rebellion, and Parents for Future joined Ende Gelände for a peaceful protest at Europe's largest coal mine, blocking operations to cut daily CO2 emissions.

This action had a dual impact: it effectively halted parts of the mine, reducing 240,000 tons of CO2 emissions daily, and symbolically demonstrated that a small group of activists can achieve more in a day than governments or corporations in decades.

Indigenous groups in North America, including the Standing Rock Sioux, have used peaceful sabotage to protect their lands and environment from pipeline projects.

At the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, activists blocked construction equipment and access to the Dakota Access Pipeline to prevent environmental damage and safeguard water sources.

These non-violent actions aimed to highlight their opposition and protect their communities from potential harm.

To get deeper into the discussion, watch the following video.

Final thoughts

Climate sabotage serves as a powerful response to the issues of numbing, perceived inefficacy, and lack of prominence that often hinder meaningful action on environmental crises.

By forcing urgent issues into the spotlight, sabotage aims to overcome the widespread apathy and inaction that arise from a sense of helplessness and the overshadowing of critical problems by less pressing concerns.

Just as PETA’s aggressive tactics effectively shifted public perception and stigmatized the wearing of fur coats, climate sabotage seeks to break through the barriers of indifference that inhibit climate action.

It has a considerable impact in challenging the status quo and catalyzing a more robust and effective response to the climate crisis.

That being said, sabotage as a strategy is not merely about creating disruption but about compelling society to confront and address its most pressing environmental issues.

Climate Sabotage: A Necessary Evil or a Dangerous Tactic?