Eco-Terrorism Possible Motivation Behind Canada Pipeline Bombs

By Madeleine Gruen

Two bombs detonated along Canada's natural gas pipeline on the border between Alberta and British Columbia in the last two weeks. The first explosion, which occurred on October 11, did not rupture the pipeline but did create an eight-foot wide by four-foot deep crater. The device was placed at a vulnerable point where the pipeline emerges from the ground. The second bomb detonated in the early hours of October 16th and caused a gas leak that forced the energy company to shut the pipeline down temporarily.

The RCMP has not disclosed whether the devices were planted by an individual or a group, but they do believe that the two recent incidents are connected and that there is a connection between the bombings and a letter that was sent to the Dawson Creek Daily News the day prior to the first explosion. The letter warned local gas and oil producers to cease operations and leave the area. The RCMP said that the letter did not contain any specific threats.

The publisher of the Dawson Creek Daily News told the CBC that the local population's anxiety about public safety has risen as a result of the increase of natural gas pipelines in the area.

Although the explosions occurred in an isolated area they could have caused serious damage. The pipeline carries sour gas which contains the highly toxic chemical compound hydrogen sulphide. The RCMP spokesman told the Canadian media that the bombings are being treated as acts of vandalism not as acts of terrorism because they occurred in remote areas and were not intended to harm people.

Whether or not environmental extremist groups should be classified as "terrorists" depends on one's definition of terrorism. Some would argue that you cannot apply the same terms to describe groups that destroy property to cause economic damage as one would to describe groups that attack to inflict mass casualties. However, to describe the attack of gas lines as "vandalism" implies mere mischievousness and does not help the public to recognize that these attacks were politically motivated and were intended to draw attention to a grievance.

The perpetrator detonated two explosive devices within days of one another. The second explosion cracked the pipeline. For the politically motivated bomber to cause this type of damage is encouraging; they were able to attract media and public attention to their grievance, and caused their target economic damage. The attackers probably see their latest attack as successful, but with only a small taste of success it is likely that they will make further attempts to sabotage the pipeline.

TrackBack