Meetings of the International Whaling Commission in recent years have tended to follow a rather similar pattern. The issues which have become regular items on the agenda include the development of the Revised Management Scheme; the scientific whaling operations of Japan and the commercial whaling operations of Norway; and the proposals for whale sanctuaries. These controversial issues will continue to be debated at the 54th Annual Meeting. Also likely to be on the list of issues is trade in whale products and aboriginal subsistence quotas (which are up for review this year). Also likely to cause controversy is the issue of Icelandic membership of the IWC. This page briefly highlights some of the important factors regarding these issues.
Revised Management Scheme / Lifting of moratorium
The issue of whether or not to allow commercial whaling to resume is the primary issue facing the IWC. Commercial whaling under the Commission has been formally prohibited since the moratorium took effect in 1986. When it was agreed in 1982, it was not intended that the moratorium would be a permanent measure. Rather, it was always intended that commercial whaling should resume after a new system for calculating sustainable quotas had been developed and whale stocks had recovered to a sufficient level. It was originally envisaged that this process would be completed within ten years. However, it is now twenty years since that decision was taken and, although the scientific quota calculation method was established several years ago, the IWC has not been able to agree on allowing commercial whaling to resume because of disagreements over additional elements such as monitoring, enforcement, DNA testing and humane killing methods. The IWC has established a working group and an expert drafting group with a view to developing these additional elements, but progress has been exceptionally slow and, even after several years of negotiation, there still seems to be little immediate prospect of agreement being reached between IWC members. At the heart of the problem is a fundamental dispute between certain members of the IWC as to whether whaling should ever be allowed to resume. Thus, while Norway and Japan, among others, argue that the IWC was established as a body to regulate the whaling industry and that it is inconsistent with the objectives of the Convention to prohibit whaling permanently, others, notably Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, are opposed to any resumption in commercial whaling, arguing that the purpose of the IWC is to ensure the conservation of whales. So far, the two major whaling nations, Norway and Japan, have preferred to argue their position from within the IWC. It is also interesting that Iceland, at a time when it is considering expanding its whaling activities, is attempting to rejoin the Commission. However, if agreement is not reached on commercial whaling in the near future, there is a very real danger that the pro-whaling countries will leave and the IWC will either disintegrate entirely or become meaningless. It is extremely doubtful, however, if any significant progress will be made on this issue at this year's meeting.
Further reading: Report of the Revised Management Scheme Expert Drafting Group 2001/2 / IWC Inter-sessional meeting: major differences remain
Scientific whaling
The scientific whaling operations of Japan have been a long-running source of controversy within the IWC, as it is widely perceived that the quotas Japan sets for itself under the guise of research are used to circumvent the moratorium on commercial whaling. The degree of controversy has increased in recent years because of an expansion in the research quotas set by Japan, both in terms of the number of whales and the range of species caught. This year, Japan announced plans to expand its research program to include the take of 50 sei whales. An additional 50 minke whales will also be caught by local whalers who have not been whaling since the moratorium. This is as well as its regular quota of 540 minke whales for research purposes. In 2000, Japan extended the research programme to include 40 Bryde’s whales and 10 sperm whales. In addition to the usual controversy over Japanese research whaling, there is also likely to be some heated discussion this year over recent proposals by Norway to allow a hunt of 60 white-sided and white-beaked dolphins for research purposes.
Whale sanctuary proposal
Australia and New Zealand will propose a
South Pacific whale sanctuary for a third time at this year's meeting. Under the
proposal, these two countries are seeking to establish an expansive area in the
South Pacific, which encompasses the breeding grounds of 11 species of whales,
in which whaling is prohibited. The proposals at the previous two meetings
achieved the support of a majority of IWC members, but not a three-quarters
majority as required under IWC rules for amendment to the Schedule. At last
year's meeting the vote was 20 in favour, 13 against and 4 abstentions. The vote
this year is likely to be closer, although it remains unlikely that Australia
and New Zealand will gain sufficient support to allow their proposal to be
adopted. In addition to the South Pacific proposal, a
proposal by Brazil and Argentina to set up a South Atlantic whale sanctuary is
likely to be introduced again. Like the South Pacific proposal, this was
introduced at last year's meeting but failed to gain the necessary level of
support. The
continuation of the Indian Ocean Sanctuary, established in 1979, will also be
reviewed this year.
Further reading: Proposed South Pacific Whale Sanctuary
Aboriginal subsistence whaling
Notwithstanding the moratorium on commercial whaling, paragraph 13 the IWC Schedule recognizes the rights of certain communities to hunt whales and dolphins for aboriginal subsistence needs. Thus, throughout the period of the moratorium, certain quotas have been set for a number of whale species, including minke, bowhead, gray, fin and humpback whales. These are taken by indigenous populations, usually using traditional hunting methods, in the United States, Greenland, Russia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. All of the quotas set by the IWC, which were mostly agreed back in 1997/1998 for a five year period, are up for review this year. There are likely to be some tough negotiations therefore, not only on quota issues but on collateral matters such as hunting methods and humane killing.
Trade in whale products
The decision of the Norwegian Government, back in January 2001, to resume exports of whale products (mainly to Japan, but also possibly to Iceland) caused considerable controversy last year and was a contentious issue at the 2001 IWC meeting. Trade has not actually started since the decision, however, mainly because of concerns over the level of contaminants in the whale products. Negotiations have been on-going between Japan and Norway and it seems likely that trade in whale meat will begin in 2002. The issue is likely, therefore, to be debated again at the 2002 Annual Meeting. However, trade in whale products is not an activity that falls within the IWC remit, and so any action by the IWC is likely to be limited to a few lines in a Resolution criticizing the decision to trade in whale products and referring to the position under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
Further reading: Trade not Tradition: The Real Driver Behind Norway's Whaling / Exports of Norwegian minke whale products (subscribers only)
Iceland's membership of the IWC
Arguably the most controversial issue at last year's meeting, the question of Icelandic membership to the IWC is again likely to dominate the early stages of this year's meeting. Iceland attempted to re-join the Commission in June last year (it had previously been a member, but left in 1992). However, it wanted to enter with a reservation, similar to that of Norway, to the moratorium on commercial whaling. There was considerable debate in the Commission as to whether such a reservation was valid and, if not, what the legal effect was. Various legal arguments were advanced by all sides, although ultimately the issue was put to a vote and, predictably, this reflected political rather than legal persuasion. The result was that Iceland was denied full membership of the Commission and was able to participate only as an observer, without voting rights.
Vote-buying
At recent meetings, and most notably at last year's meeting, Japan was accused of "buying votes" by offering development aid to certain countries, most notably the Caribbean island States, in return for support for Japanese positions within the IWC. These allegations were, in general, denied by these countries, although in what became something of a diplomatic own-goal, an official of the Fisheries Agency of Japan appeared to admit this practice during the 2001 meeting, although those comments were later denied. Nevertheless, this does in fact appear to have been the policy as the six Eastern Caribbean States (Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, St Kitts and Nevis), along with Morocco (with which there has been increased dialogue with Japan in recent years on the whaling issue) voted with Japan on the vast majority of issues, even though it may be thought that they had little common interest in many of the issues. This led to the anti-whaling majority in the IWC adopting a Resolution condemning the practice. Similar objections are likely to be raised at the 2002 meeting, particularly after the recent accession of three African countries - Cape Verde, Benin and Gabon - all of which have received development support from Japan.