What Big Oil Knew-

The global climate crisis has been the subject of much popular attention and some policy concern. International summits have continued to raise the issue, and the UN Secretary General’s most pressing concern is, by account, the devastation that is to be wrought to human societies by climate change, not least in the developing world. There are, however, many holdouts to progress on climate change, among whom the rightwing parties in the United States and Australia are the most egregious deniers. Yet civil society and policymakers are but two elements in the larger equation, albeit a crucial one. It is also important to gauge the role of energy companies, not just in how they react today, but also in how they have led us to the present juncture.

A recent study by Supran et al. provides damning findings about the extent to which major energy companies (or “Big Oil” as they are colloquially known) were aware of the impact of their operations on climate change. For decades, Big Oil sought to suppress what its own climate models were showing, that non-renewable energy extraction was accelerating climate change, and the consequences for human society would be severe. Like Big Tobacco before it, the strategy of Big Oil lay in stressing that things were “inconclusive,” and therefore harsh penalties based on “unproven” hypotheses would be unfair to them, especially since they were such large job creators, significant taxpayers, and they provided something in very high demand.

In the public sphere, they constantly contested the emergent findings of independent scientists, and rested their claims on the need for further data. The twist was, as Supran et al.’s findings show, that even their internal models were warning of dire consequences, which “overwhelmingly acknowledged that climate change is real and human-caused.” Not just that, their models were surprisingly accurate when one measures the pattern that climate change has followed ex-post. Yet despite knowing this, Big Oil withheld the relevant climate findings because they would harm their profits. Today, the destruction to lives and livelihoods due to accelerating climate change is simply reinforcing what they knew but hid.

There are many countries, particularly the more climate-vulnerable ones in the Global South, which are raising a common voice for climate justice. A resolution that is to be tabled by Vanuatu is but one in a series of such appeals to the world’s conscience to act before it is too late (although in some ways it already is). Vanuatu’s resolution is backed by more than 100 countries, and seeks to involve the International Court of Justice in ruling on the nature of the responsibility that countries have on climate change. Vanuatu has been hit by two cyclones on two straight days, and their insistence on this matter of climate justice is both laudable and necessary.

The economic damage that is already occurring, and which shall occur in years to come, far outstrips the profits that Big Oil made. To what degree will Big Oil be made accountable for what it knew? It is easy to expect that very little will be done: Big Oil doesn’t just have big pockets, it has a loud voice. In the Trump Administration, former ExxonMobil executive Rex Tillerson served as Secretary of State, and it was his company whose internal models were pointing to the dangers most accurately, but which suppressed the truth most vociferously.

In the post-Covid era, what had been an emergent consensus on dealing with climate change has been dampened (or at least slowed) to a degree. This is because, in light of the Russo-Ukrainian war’s impact on global energy supplies, many countries which were otherwise proactively turning towards renewables have instead veered towards coal, including China and European countries. In Vanuatu’s resolution, support has not come from serious coal junkies such as the United States, India, China, or Indonesia. In sum, we could have known long ago, we do know now, and yet there isn’t enough being done.

Dr. Usman W. Chohan is Advisor (Economic Affairs and National Development) at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad. He can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

Space-Enabled Warfare in the 21st Century: Pathways for Developing States

Space has emerged as a distinct domain of warfare alongside land, sea, air, and cyber. Developed countries like the United States, Russia, and China possess offensive and support capabilities in space. In the shadowed expanse of Low Earth Orbit (LEO), where satellites operate like silent custodians, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine transformed the nature of modern conflict. As Russian troops marched forward, the commercial satellites like Maxar and Planet, which are operated by Western firms, captured high-resolution imagery of Russian troops, providing real-time intelligence to Ukrainian commanders, unlike ever before.

Read More »

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »