It fought to save the whales. Can Greenpeace save itself?

A multimillion-dollar lawsuit over a US pipeline protest could inflict a huge blow at a challenging time for the entire environmental movement.

- Karen Zraick

Greenpeace is among the most well-known environmental organisations in the world, the result of more than 50 years of headline-grabbing protest tactics.

Its activists have confronted whaling ships on the high seas. They've hung banners from the Eiffel Tower. They've occupied oil rigs. A (fictional) activist even sailed with Greenpeace in an episode of the TV show Seinfeld, in hopes of capturing the heart of the character Elaine.

Now, Greenpeace's very existence is under threat: A lawsuit seeks at least US$300 million (S$400 million) in damages. Greenpeace has said such a loss in court could force it to shut down its American offices. In the coming days, a jury is expected to render its verdict.

The lawsuit is over Greenpeace's role in protests a decade ago against a pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in the US state of North Dakota. The pipeline's owner, Energy Transfer, says Greenpeace enabled illegal attacks on the project and led a "vast, malicious publicity campaign" that cost the company money.

Greenpeace says that it played only a minor, peaceful role in the indigenous-led protest, and that the lawsuit's real aim is to limit free speech not just at the organisation, but also across America, by raising the spectre of expensive court fights.

The suit comes at a time of immense challenges for the entire environmental movement. Climate change is making storms, floods and wildfires more frequent and more dangerous. The Trump administration has commenced a historic effort to overturn decades of environmental protections. Many of the movement's most significant achievements over the past half-century are at risk.

And in recent years the potential costs of protest have already risen.