By Max Wilbert / Featured image: an oil processing facility in Saudi Arabia, Planet Labs, CC BA-SA 4.0
On Saturday, September 14th, a “suicide drone” attack struck the Abqaiq oil processing facility in Buqayq, Saudi Arabia. The drones were destroyed in the attack, but at this time it is not believed that the operators were exposed or harmed in any way.
Abqaiq is the largest oil facility in the world, with the capacity to process 7% of global oil supplies. Before the attack it was refining around 6.8 million barrels of oil per day. The attack is believed to have reduced Saudi Oil production by 50 percent, or 6 million barrels per day. That’s equivalent to the national usage of India and Australia combined, or more than 1/3rd of the United States oil consumption.
Saudi Arabia produces 10% of the global supply of crude oil. Therefore, this single attack, believed to have been carried out with roughly 10 drones with a range of less than 100 miles, cut world oil production by 5 percent.
The use of drones in warfare has risen over the past five years. Initially, large UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) designed by U.S. weapons manufacturers dominated drone warfare. Increasingly, however, small and even off-the-shelf drones are being used in asymmetrical conflict to great effect. For example, in Syria, Daesh (Isis) and Hezbollah have both been recorded using inexpensive off-the-shelf drones to scout and direct fire for ground troops, to drop small bombs, and as “suicide bombers.”
Environmentalists should take heed. This one attack—albeit an attack unlikely to be motivated by concern for the planet and ecology—has been more effective than the entire environmental movement, which has failed to stop the growth in fossil fuel production and consumption. These new tactics change how strategies such as Decisive Ecological Warfare could be implemented.
Some people may worry about the environmental damage caused by such a massive fire. But we should remember that all the petroleum processed at this refinery would have been burned anyway. The only difference is that it would have been burned while powering cargo ships, mining platforms, tanks, and other destructive industrial infrastructure. It is always preferable to see petroleum burn all at once, with no application, than to have it all burned over time while aiding in the destruction of the planet. The destruction of the equipment also means that more fossil fuels will stay in the ground for longer, since if there is no nearby processing capacity for them, extraction must stop. With very few exceptions, the living world would benefit from any fossil fuel infrastructure being destroyed, no matter how “messy” that destruction is.
This episode of The Green Flame podcast looks at Decisive Ecological Warfare, the only revolutionary environmental strategy designed to dismantle the global industrial economy by any means necessary.
Our show features a conversation with movement lawyer and poet Will Falk, and Deep Green Resistance co-author and philosopher Derrick Jensen. The conversation covers ecological collapse, resistance, morality, immigration, permaculture, and more.
We also share poetry by the exiled black revolutionary Assata Shakur, and 9 Principles of War from the U.S. Military that can be adapted for use by activists. Our music track for this episode is “Crying Over You” by Christoper Morrow, used under CC BY 3.0.
The Green Flame is a Deep Green Resistance podcast offering revolutionary analysis, skill sharing, and inspiration for the movement to save the planet by any means necessary. Our hosts are Max Wilbert and Jennifer Murnan.
Decisive Ecological Warfare
Decisive Ecological Warfare (DEW) is the strategy of a movement that has too long been on the defensive. It is the war cry of a people who refuse to lose any more battles, the last resort of a movement isolated, co-opted, and weary from never-ending legal battles and blockades.
The information in the DEW strategy is derived from military strategy and tactics manuals, analysis of historic resistances, insurgencies, and national liberation movements. The principles laid out within these pages are accepted around the world as sound principles of asymmetric warfare, where one party is more powerful than the other. If any fight was ever asymmetric, this one is.
The strategies and tactics explained in DEW are taught to military officers at places like the Military Academy at West Point for a simple reason: they are extremely effective.
When he was on trial in South Africa in 1964 for his crimes against the apartheid regime, Nelson Mandela said: “I do not deny that I planned sabotage. I did not do this in a spirit of recklessness. I planned it as a result of a long and sober assessment of the political situation after many years of oppression of my people by the whites.”
We invite you to read this strategy, and to undertake that same long and sober assessment of the situation we face. Time is short.
I am one of the researchers on the Underground Action Calendar. I really love it. I can’t help but smile when I read of efforts to try to destroy parts of the infrastructure of civilization. Around the world individuals are burning, bombing, dismantling and sabotaging telephone towers, electrical stations, pipelines, mines, communication cables, cyber networks and more!
But there is a problem in my research efforts at this time and I need your help. Specifically, there seem to be fewer and fewer publications of the incidents (action items) that I need for the calendar. I think that this problem is so pronounced now due to the current political climate in the U.S. where I live.
We are looking for published write-ups of completed attacks on infrastructure. In the past I used a global database (of “terrorist” incidents), which includes items through 2017. I feel that I have largely picked over that database. I am currently using several other sources, but they mostly seem to be limiting themselves to acts of protest and/or civil disobedience. While we recognize that these actions are necessary, they are not what we’re looking to include in the calendar.
Please send me info on or links to sources that you know of in your country. Thank you. Together we can turn the lights off!
About the Underground Action Calendar
The Underground Action Calendar exists to publicize and normalize the use of militant and underground tactics in the fight for justice and sustainability. We include below a wide variety of actions from struggles around the world, especially those in which militants target infrastructure, because we believe this sort of action is necessary to dismantle civilization. Listing an action does not necessarily mean we support or stand behind the goals, strategies, or tactics of those actionists.
This page highlights specific actions. See also our Resistance Profiles for broader information on the strategies, tactics, goals, and effectiveness of various historic and contemporary resistance groups.
Editors note: sabotage is a key tactic for asymmetrical conflicts, such as the struggle to defend the planet from capitalism and industrial civilization. This material is excerpted from a paper written by U.S. Air Force Captain Howard L. Douthit III. You can read the full paper on Archive.org.
The Use and Effectiveness of Sabotage as a Means of Unconventional Warfare — an Historical Perspective from World War I Through Vietnam
By USAF Captain Howard L. Douthit III
To be effective, sabotage had to accomplish what is expected of any offensive military operation–inflict damage on the enemy’s ability to wage war. Again, history supported the thesis that sabotage is an effective means of warfare. Sabotage was used against both strategic and tactical targets. It was proven capable of being used near the front line, in the rear areas, and even in support areas out of the theater.
To be sure, sabotage had to be performed properly to obtain the desired results. However, that is true of any operation. Also, as with any type of operation there were failures to go along with the successes. The failures seen, however, seemed to be due more to faulty planning, inadequate time for planning, inadequate or improper equipment, and not following the plan of operation rather than a failure due to the actual act of sabotage. Again, these problems could spell failure for any operation. The multiple target types that could be hit in the multiple depths of operation, the ability of sabotage to accomplish what conventional operations many times could not, the flexibility of not necessarily needing sophisticated equipment, and the seeming lack of effective countermeasures shown all bear out the logical conclusion that sabotage was deemed effective in history. Military leaders who employed sabotage saw its effect on the enemy and increased its use. Enemy leaders wrote about the ill effects it had on their side. In all these ways, sabotage proved itself effective in history.
Lessons learned
There are several lessons to be learned from this research effort:
Sabotage can be accomplished after the person(s) has infiltrated an organization, industry or factory. This sabotage could take on the form of physical destruction of material, facilities or personnel.It could also take on the form of subversion in an effort to reduce or stop production.
Underground/resistance movements make use of printed material to spread instructions on how to commit sabotage.
Timing of the sabotage could mean the difference between knocking out an asset that could be used by both sides or only hindering the enemy. For example, blowing up a bridge prematurely to prevent enemy use may impede a possible advance should the momentum of a battle turn. Timing can also spell the difference between knocking out one asset or several assets at once (eg, just blowing up a section of train track or waiting to also demolish a supply train as well).
Sabotage may sometimes succeed when conventional forces cannot. Skorenzy’s ability to blow up a bridge that stood the test of 500 failed dive bomber runs illustrated this well.
History does not point to an effective countermeasure to sabotage.
Sabotage can be used to draw troop strength from vital battle zones.
Selective sabotage is used to destroy or render inoperable assets not easily replaced or repaired in time to meet the enemy’s crucial needs. The required down time of the target depends on the target itself. For example, a crucial route might only need to be impassable for several days near the front, whereas an oil refinery might need to down for months to show the effects of its loss on a war.
Sabotage can be used against both tactical and strategic targets.
Any nation, rich or poor, large or small can effect sabotage against an aggressor.
Sabotage is an economical form of warfare, requiring only a mode of transportation (possibly walking), a properly trained individual, and an applicable sabotage device.
Editors note: this material is excerpted from a Deep Green Resistance database called “Resistance Profiles,” which explores various movements, their strategies and tactics, and their effectiveness. Image credit: public domain.
Movement for the Emancipation for the Niger Delta (MEND)
Active: 2005 – 2013
Location: Nigeria
Type: Underground Resistance Movement
Success: Medium
Goal
Majority or total control of oil production/revenues in the Niger Delta (for the Ogoni people) and withdrawal of the Nigerian military from the Niger Delta.
Strategy
Totally destroy the capacity of the Nigerian government to export oil in the Niger Delta, force the multinational oil companies to discontinue operations, and likely precipitate a nationwide budgetary and economic crisis.
Tactics
sabotage of oil infrastructure
bombing near military, government or oil industry infrastructure or buildings
theft
guerrilla warfare
kidnapping of foreign oil workers for ransom (MEND has a very good record of returning them unharmed)
MEND uses speed boats in swarm-based maneuvers to quickly attack targets in succession. Multiple highly maneuverable, well trained and armed units have kept the government and Shell’s defensive systems off-balance defending their sprawling networks (1,000 oil wells, 6,000 km of pipeline over 70,000 square miles).
Very effective use of system disruption: targets have been systematically and accurately selected to completely shut down production and delay and/or halt repairs.
Organization
MEND, an umbrella organization, has evolved into a conglomeration of distinct militant groups with constantly shifting alliances and loyalties. Command and control is believed to be hierarchical. Leaders are frequently deposed or replaced by rivals, due to internal conflicts over proceeds from criminal and political activities, and due to Ijaw tradition of choosing tribal leaders on a rotational basis
Above/Underground
Underground cells with a few spokesmen that communicate with the international media
Security
Leaders are always on the move and extremely cautious. They do not take telephone calls personally, knowing that soldiers hunting for them have electronic devices capable of pinpointing mobile phone signals. During raids, fighters wear masks to protect their identity. All communication with the media is conducted using aliases. MEND does not reveal identities of its rank and file and conducts all recruiting clandestinely. The fluid and contradictory organization structure may or may not be by design but is very effective at obscuring the leadership and increasing the operational security of key individuals
Recruitment
Draws its fighters from communities across the delta: ethnic militias in the west and from cults (criminal gangs) in the east
Effectiveness
Has not yet achieved its goal, but its strategy and tactics have been effective, resulting in a cut of more than 28 percent of Nigeria’s oil output from 2006 to 2009. In August 2009, the government offered a 60 day amnesty: militants who handed in their weapons were pardoned for their crimes, given job training and were paid US $410 per month until they found work. But the ceasefire and amnesty ended in December when MEND attacked a Shell/Chevron pipeline amidst questions about President Yar’ Adua’s health and impatience with the slow pace of job growth.
In mid-July, an armed attack on ICE facilities in Tacoma, Washington took place. Here’s a brief summary of what happened:
Will Van Spronsen… was killed [on July 13th] while carrying out a raid against a migrant concentration camp in Tacoma, Washington State. Van Spronsen is thought to be the first person killed attempting to take direct action against the US deportation system, which for months has faced heavy criticism over its use of concentration camps to break up families and detain migrant children.
The 69-year-old, known as an anti-fascist and campaigner against migrant detention, was shot dead by four police officers as he attempted to set fire to deportation buses stationed at the Northwest Detention Center (NWDC), a few hours after a peaceful protest against the facility had been held.
Deep Green Resistance recognizes, first and foremost, that Immigration and Customs Enforcement is nothing more than the paramilitary wing of the settler nation. Tacoma, like all of so-called North America, rests on stolen land – as an illegitimate occupier, this government has no right to establish or enforce imaginary borders across the territory of the Coast Salish people or any other indigenous community.
DGR affirms the struggle against all forms of xenophobia and white supremacy, and we stand in solidarity with those who resist ICE and its glorified ethnic cleansing. Direct action of this kind against the American immigration enforcement is justified and moral.
However, we also affirm the need for strategic, organized resistance that is capable of striking decisive blows against the settler state. Lone-wolf attacks of this nature are unlikely to achieve much beyond the symbolic. While we honor Van Spronsen’s bravery, we encourage activists to evaluate actions like these and consider more effective methods and strategies.
Decisive Ecological Warfare, the strategy of Deep Green Resistance, provides a detailed roadmap for creating and maintaining a militant resistance movement capable of overturning the white supremacist settler state. As aboveground activists, we must work to harness and direct the kind of fury and passion that leads to attacks like these, away from individual expressions of rage and towards organized militancy on behalf of the planet and all oppressed peoples.
