Wednesday - June 23, 2010

Thar She Blows … oops, never mind

Talks on a resumption of commercial whaling broke down today on the third day of an international whaling meeting that’s being held under a cloud of scandal and legal disputes.

Japan had hoped to cut a deal at this year’s International Whaling Commission summit in Morocco that would allow it to resume commercial whaling for the first time since the mid-1980s, in exchange for trimming its controversial “research” catch in Antarctica. But it reportedly refused to promise an eventual halt to such research whaling, scuttling the deal, according to the New York Times.

A quarter-century ban on commercial whaling, one of the world’s most successful preservation agreements, could crumble if conservationists cannot persuade Japan to cut back on the tradition it champions. Here, a Japanese ship hauls a whale up its slipway in the Antarctic in 2009.

The breakdown in talks mean a continuation of the status quo—whereby Japan, Norway and Iceland conduct their controversial, unregulated hunts despite a ban on commercial whaling and heated opposition from environmentalists.

In an interview with Radio Australia, Glenn Inwood, a spokesman for Japan’s delegation to the whaling meeting in Morocco, said Japan was willing to cut a deal whereby it would shrink its research catch in the Antarctic in return for being allowed to resume limited commercial whaling.

“Japan is very willing to compromise,” Inwood said. “It has made a number of significant concessions to the IWC to this process ... now it’s time for anti-whaling countries to bring something to the table instead of digging their heels in, but they’re not.”

In an interview at his Tokyo office earlier this year, Konomu Kubo of the Japan Whaling Association said, “Japan supports the principle of sustainable whaling, but we do not in the least support the idea of harvesting whales whose numbers are depleted.”

“We are groping for some sort of compromise,” said Kubo.

He said then that it might not be “realistic” to expect a lifting of the whaling ban this year since three-quarters of the IWC’s 88 members would need to support such a move. (Japan is believed to have the backing of just 38 members, according to the Times of London.)

Some scientists and researchers who strongly oppose the killing of whales are even arguing for “whale rights,” with one group issuing a declaration in May, according to Al-Jazeera.

Japanese officials and environmentalists traded blame Wednesday as nations failed to reach a deal to curb whale hunts by Japan, Norway and Iceland that kill hundreds of whales every year.

The 88 nations of the International Whaling Commission held two days of intense closed-door talks on a proposal to ease the 25-year-old ban on commercial whaling in exchange for smaller kills by the three countries that claim exemptions to the moratorium on hunting for profit.

About 1,500 animals are killed each year by Japan, Norway and Iceland. Japan, which kills the majority of whales, insists its hunt is for scientific research — but more whale meat and whale products end up in Japanese restaurants than in laboratories.
...
Acting IWC chairman Anthony Liverpool told an open meeting Wednesday that “fundamental positions remained very much apart.”

“After nearly three years of discussions, it appears our discussions are at an impasse,” said chief U.S. delegate Monica Medina.

Meanwhile, the scandal drama continues to unfold:

Seventeen mostly pro-whaling nations have had their voting rights suspended at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting in Morocco, in what could be a blow to Japan’s hopes of resuming commercial whaling.
...
The countries include Palau, the Marshall Islands, Ghana and Gambia and are mostly drawn from the pro-whaling bloc which had been expected to back Japan’s move.

They have been suspended for reasons including failing to pay their annual fees.

Solomon Islands, meanwhile, failed to show up at the meeting.

Hmm ... now which countries do you think have been accused of taking bribes from Japan? Yup! It’s the most amazing coincidence ever!

Not that those accused are taking this lying down. No sir! From the bottom of the world in the Caribbean (Basseterre in St. Kitt’s, a poor but unspoiled island not overrun with tourists, it’s main bay the home of the largest pirate fleet ever to set sail. An island ironically shaped like a whale) comes a cry of innocence. From his luxury villa, no doubt

Marine Resources Minister, Dr. Timothy Harris, caught up in a sting operation by a British newspaper, has said that he is a victim of a smear campaign.
The newspaper has alleged that six countries, including Grenada and St. Kitts-Nevis, have been accepting brides to support Japan’s pro-whaling position.
In response Dr Harris said: “What we have here is clearly an effort by those who are opposed to whaling, to use every means including subterfuge, to influence policy positions of small countries that are members of IWC.”
He said the bribe allegations were all part of an “evil and vicious” smear campaign.
The Sunday Times newspaper said it had carried out an undercover investigation that exposed Japan’s bribery.
...
According to the article, the governments of Grenada, St Kitts and Nevis, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, the Republic of Guinea and Ivory Coast all entered negotiations to sell their votes in return for aid.
The Times said it had filmed government officials making several admissions about getting something in return for taking a pro-whaling stance.
It did not specify the particular aid that Grenada and St Kitts received.
...
Artherton Martin of Dominica said there was “incontrovertible evidence” to support the Sunday Times allegations of payments.
He claimed that Japan had paid the “extraordinarily high” annual membership dues of the IWC on behalf of Eastern Caribbean nations.

A “vile orchestration of lies, innuendos and insinuations” is how Hon. Dr. Timothy Harris describes allegations of his involvement in the International Whaling Commission (IWC) vote selling scandal.
...
Japan is also accused of providing million-dollar aid packages for these countries in exchange for their vote opposing a de facto moratorium on commercial whale hunting.
...
They were each offered £25m in aid over 10 years. Six countries indicated they were willing to consider our offer. They were St. Kitts and Nevis, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Grenada, Ivory Coast and Guinea.
...
Dr. Harris, who was appointed Minister of Marine Resources in February this year, contends that the discussions centered on the Federation’s whaling position, and at no time was there any negotiation for personal gain.

And Cameron? well, I don’t know if the moratorium ever actually came up for a vote at the conference. The news isn’t actually clear on that point, only that the measure to exchange the moratorium for limited hunting failed. And it failed even though the hunting plan would take about 1/3 as many whales as the old “scientific research” plan had. And there is media coverage (true or not, your call) that says those Whale Wars operations are the parties responsible for Japan’s harvesting of many less whales this last year than it wanted for that “research”. BUT, if the issue did actually come up for a vote, then David Cameron was going to vote for continuing the moratorium, even though the EU had decided it’s voting bloc was going for the limited hunting approach. Between the doubletalk, the doublespeak, and the double negations of the wordings, it’s hard to make out the truth.

David Cameron is ready for his first confrontation with the European Union if he attempts to stop the international ban on whaling being lifted.

The Coalition faces a multi-million-pound fine for voting to maintain the moratorium if, as expected, the rest of the EU refuses to oppose moves to legalise the slaughter of whales.
..
Most leading European nations, including Britain, support the moratorium. But under EU rules, unless all 25 Member States agree the organisation cannot vote, and Denmark is determined to block any EU bid to oppose the Japanese.

However, The Mail on Sunday has learned that if the EU does stand aside at the IWC showdown in Morocco, the British Government is considering defying the EU by voting in favour of maintaining the ban.

So, 88 members in the IWC. 17 sent to the corner for a time out. The 25 from the EU internally blocked from voting. That leaves only 46, and at least one country didn’t attend. So 45 at the most went to the conference. And 44 is just half the group. How many do they need for a quorum? If it’s 51%, then ever single attending nation would have had to vote in favor of this measure. So my guess is that it died on the floor and never came to a vote.

Obama recently came out in favor of the measure. When it comes right down to it, which is the better approach? Which way protects more whales? The “scientific research” moratorium with it’s higher quotas that have been kept low due to harassment, or the “leave us alone and we will sign a bit of paper saying we’ll only take fewer” hunting plan? And out on the cold and lonely ocean, with nobody watching, you’d have to take those hunters on faith. Because for the sushi and canned seafood market in Japan, whales are nearly worth their weight in gold. 30 tons at a time. No temptation for over-fishing there at all, no sir.

PS - to either just stir the pot, or to get their “dibs” in ahead of any change in international regulations, Japan sent it’s whaling fleet to see quite early this year, 10 days before this vote was scheduled for. With the plan to catch sperm whales, one of the more seriously endangered whales out there napping vertically in the sea.

Conservation groups have condemned Japan for starting its summer whaling hunt in the north-west Pacific less than 10 days before the annual whaling commission meets.

A Japanese whaling fleet consisting of three harpoon and two research ships left port yesterday to hunt 160 whales before returning in August.

Their quota is to kill 100 sei whales, 50 bryde’s whales and 10 sperm whales before returning in late August.
...
“To be doing it when governments are trying to reach a compromise over the future of whaling it is just adding insult to injury.

“It’s just serving to put pressure - undue pressure - on governments to capitulate to their demands.”

Posted by Drew458     on 06/23/2010 at 03:06 PM   
Filed Under: • Animals • International •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner