The fate of nature's largest marine mammals has been the topic of closed door discussions this past week at the annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in Agadir, Morocco. Negotiations could have potentially seen the reinstatement of commercial whaling for the first time since the international moratorium was put into effect in 1986. On Wednesday the commission failed to seal the deal, which may appear at first glance as good news for the whales, but still leaves their immediate future in the corrupt hands of rogue whaling nations such as Iceland, Norway and Japan who have continued to illegally hunt tens of thousands of whales since the supposed "ban" was initially introduced three decades ago.
Created after World War II to conserve and manage international whale stocks, The IWC is made up of delegates from 88 both pro and anti-whaling nations, some of whom have no legitimate business in being at the bargaining table in the first place. According to former UN scientist and veteran IWC attendee Dr. Sidney Holt, the officially titled, "Proposed Consensus Decision to Improve the Conservation of Whales," is really "a proposal for the destruction of the International Whaling Commission as a serious inter-governmental body for both the conservation of whales and managing future human uses of them, using relevant and competent scientific and legal advice."
In a speech given to delegates earlier this week, Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett deemed the potential lifting of the 24-year-old moratorium as an impossibility. Garrett, who has come under fire from several key conservationists over the years for his softened stance on whaling issues, appears to finally be stepping up to the plate on behalf of the gentle giants of the sea. Australia not only led the way in opposition of the eventually rejected "peace plan" but they have also recently brought about a lawsuit against Japan at the International Court of Justice in the Netherlands to end the annual hunt in the Antarctic waters that are major feeding grounds for nearly four-fifths of the world's whales.
One of the major components comprising the moot deal would have been the allotment of a certain quota of whales to be legally hunted off the coastal waters of Japan and other pro-whaling nations in exchange for a significant reduction in the number of whales killed in Japan's annual bloodbath in the southern oceans. Hidden under the false guise of "scientific research," Japan's whaling program in the southern hemisphere sanctuary has long made a mockery of basic human intelligence as anyone with an IQ above room temperature can clearly decipher the difference between research and profit. With initiatives set forth by Japan's Institute of Cetacean Research with bogus names like "krill abundance and the feeding ecology of whales," one must wonder about the groundbreaking findings of such in depth analysis. However, the reality is that in over two-and-a-half decades of mass slaughter of these magnificent beings, not a single study has been conducted that has produced any significant conclusions. In short, the Japanese have been allowed to brutally murder 1,000 whales per year in Antarctica in order to inform the global community of their big breakthrough in scientific research: whales eat plankton, lots and lots of plankton. Look out Einstein, we seem to have some real braniacs on our hands here!
Some conservationists argue that the entire "trade off" proposal has been a blow to any real progress of The IWC and criticize certain non-profits for their consideration of the compromise deal as it further undermines the ultimate goal of abolishment of ALL whaling in the world's oceans. Noted Ramon Cardona, founder of Ocean Sentry, who was on the ground this week patiently awaiting the small time slot allowed for the NGO conglamerate's participation in open discussion meetings, "It is absolutely unacceptable that non-profit organizations such as Greenpeace, WWF and PEW, are in favor of the return to commercial whaling in the northern hemisphere in order to phase out whaling in the southern sanctuary. Not only does this go directly against the moratorium on commercial whaling, but it is even more disgraceful coming from supposed environmental organizations who are avidly collecting funds to defend whales."
To add further controversy to this year's meeting, Japan has recently been implicated in a vote-buying scandal in the weeks leading up to the IWC. Whether or not this revelation has influenced the suspension of 17 of the meeting's 88 member nation's right to vote by deputy chairman Anthony Liverpool, a diplomat from Antigua and Barbuda, is still under suspicion by critics. According to the London Sunday Times, Liverpool also appears to be living large at a luxury beach resort courtesy of the government of Japan to which he was quoted by the Associated Press as stating there was, "nothing odd about that." Other reports of bribery have come in the form of overseas aid, cash payments in envelopes and the offer of prostitutes to delegates. The countries banned from voting this year included Palau, the Marshall Islands, Ghana and Gambia and comprised mainly pro-whaling nations which had been expected to back Japan's proposal.
While the issue of fraudulent votes was publicly exposed in the recent Academy Award-winning film The Cove, the film has also put Japan in the hot seat for its horrific annual slaughter of tens of thousands of dolphins and pilot whales in Japanese coastal waters, who are not accounted for or regulated under IWC mandate due to their smaller size. With growing momentum from the film's overwhelming success and the recent worldwide media attention brought about by Sea Shepherd's latest high stakes campaign in the southern ocean, Japan is certainly feeling the pressure from the global community to put an end to its barbaric whaling practices. Of course one can not expect overnight miracles from a country whose former lead whaling negotiator, Masayuki Komatsu, once referred to the cetacean nation as the "cockroaches of the sea." However, one can always continue to have hope.
Follow Deborah Bassett on Twitter: www.twitter.com/debstact
(not a fan of me)
the idea of a total whaling ban is utopian at best. if the IWC completely outlaws it then japan will go rogue on the issue and dare the international court of justice (LOL) to do something about it. it's better to have the japanese in the fold with a carve out than to not.
http://www.seashepherd.org/
all three countries are exploiting a loophole likely specifically carved out for them by the IWC in order to get these nations to agree to some sort of protection of the species. it has paid off. whale populations have begun to return. shunning the japanese and other whaling nations for the ideal of a total ban will do more harm than good because, as i said, they will go rogue.
Ignorant slobs. There are some things that some conservatives and liberals can agree upon and this is one of them.
This comparison is nonsense. It's meat. Rhinocerous horns don't increase libido but whale meat does feed people.
And lots of people like it. I rarely eat whale but only because I don't find it tastes all that great (raw horse--'basashi'--is much better).
So is Soylent Green.
i get that he has a job and it is not running out on the delta or boarding a foreign ship, but he is too reckless with his young, idealistic crew who are willing to put their lives on the line for the whales.
Of course, it is responsible behavior for Japanese governments and corporations to lie to international courts, mislead international organizations, bribe landlocked governments, corrupt officials, and send young Japanese men in tiny little boats to violently defy ships acting under International Law (which actually does allow for the actions of Paul Watson to intervene and prevent them from breaking the law.), placing their lives at risk thousands of miles from home and in sub zero weather for the sake of ... whale meat?
The IWC science is clear - the stocks of the main species the Japanese, Icelandics and Norwegians want to hunt are healthy and increasing. Some the largest ever measured.
True, Japan has been assisting developing countries with aid to develop their fisheries, however, these are fishing nations. It has been the Europeans and Americans who have been promoting the stacking of the IWC with land-locked countries in order to "save the whales".
The article quotes Dr. Sidney Holt. He is correct in that the International Whaling Commission was established to manage a hunt. Not to stop hunting whales. It has produced clear scientific evidence on the health of certain stocks, but at the political level that advice has been ignored.
The Japanese are using a legal device found in all international fisheries organizations - the right to object to any decision being imposed on them by a majority. It was this right to object that the European Union used in the 1980's to overfish stocks and decimate them on the Grand Banks off Newfoundland. The big difference is that the scientific advice for the whale stocks being targeted are healthy whereas the advice in the Northwest Atlantic the stocks were at their lowest level ever recorded.
What a load...
Reminds me of the US.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vU7Lz1vT4w&feature=player_embedded