By Kitty Block
St. Kitts, West Indies—Whether it was a declaration, a resolution, or merely a sign of trouble ahead, Japan closed the proceedings today at the 58th annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission with a victory that left conservation-minded countries frustrated and uncertain about what it all meant.
The St. Kitts and Nevis Declaration, submitted by the host country late Saturday and revised on Sunday, proposed no official actions. What it did do was put the IWC seal of approval on a number of inflammatory statements to which the conservation nations don't subscribe. Among them:
- That the IWC is "about managing whaling to ensure whale stocks are not over-harvested rather than protecting all whales respective of their abundance"
- That the "moratorium which was clearly intended as a temporary measure is no longer necessary"
- That "scientific research has shown that whales consume huge quantities of fish, making the issue a matter of food security for coastal nations and requiring that the issue of management of whale stocks must be considered…"
- That commissioners "declare our commitment to normalizing the functions of the IWC…"
The declaration, which required a simple majority, passed by one vote. The final tally was 33 for, 32 against, and one abstention.
"St. Kitts submitted the proposal, but obviously Japan's fingerprints were all over it," said Humane Society International President Patricia Forkan. "The declaration is exactly that—a declaration of belief from the 33 countries that supported it. It's nothing more. It's not a binding resolution, and should Japan try to use the declaration in other international forums to argue for increased whaling or increased trade in whale meat, those international organizations will see right through the manipulations that occurred here today."
Following the vote, conservation nations lined up to voice their opposition to the declaration—and to disassociate themselves with the statements contained in the document. Conservation commissioners spoke boldly and loudly for more than 30 minutes after the vote, a prolonged outrage that one veteran IWC observer had never witnessed before at an annual meeting.
Both Brazil and New Zealand challenged the validity of the vote; representatives from each country made the claim that Iceland, which rejoined the IWC in 2002 under controversial circumstances, was not an official member of the organization. Australian Environment Minister Ian Campbell called the declaration a "resolution that does not resolve anything." And Israeli Commissioner Esther Efrat-Smilg noted that a "declaration should be achieved by consensus," not by a simple majority of like-minded nations.
All of the indignation underscored an awful fact that conservation countries had hoped they would never face: that after nearly 30 years of working to protect whales, the IWC was back in the hands of pro-whaling nations.
The morning session was dominated with discussions of whale sanctuaries.
Random spoutings from the IWC meeting:
• At the start of the afternoon session on Sunday, Japan claimed that a member of its delegation received a threatening email. IWC commissioners agreed to condemn any and all acts of intimidation toward members of the organization. At least one attendee wondered privately if Japan wasn't setting the stage for a censure of Greenpeace, which has tried to disrupt Japanese research whaling boats in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
• Japan tried to justify its two scientific whaling programs—JARPA II in the Antarctic and JARPN II in the Western North Pacific—with two brief PowerPoint presentations. Conservation-minded countries found many faults with both presentations. They hit Japan particularly hard on the JARPN II report and the country's insistence that whales compete with fish for food, thereby causing fisheries to collapse:
Monaco Commissioner Frederic Briand said Japan has brilliant scientists in the areas of bio- and nano-technologies, which made it difficult for him to understand why the nation's fisheries scientists fail to "match their colleagues." Briand said it's "very embarrassing to for my delegation to see old models."
An Australian representative said Japan's theory that whales crash fish stocks is "close to farcical" without factoring in the huge role that human fisheries play in the collapse.
The HSUS and Humane Society International have issued an updated report solidly repudiating Japan's claim.
• In Japan's JARPN II report, the country played a brief video showing a minke whale breaching near the side of a fishing boat. Japan claimed this was evidence that whales compete with humans for declining fish stocks. Mexico called the video "very poor proof," while Luxembourg doubted the validity of the video itself, believing that Japan spliced tape from two different events. Japan's Alternate Commissioner Joji Morishita responded by offering Luxembourg a copy of the video. "You can look at it over and over again if you like," he said.
• Australian Environment Minister Ian Campbell presented a PowerPoint of his own—on non-lethal whale research methods and how they can substitute for Japan's bloody brand of whale inquiry. After Japan responded to some of the criticisms in Australia's presentation, Campbell extended an olive branch, of sorts, to the pro-whaling nation. He offered to show Japan the finer techniques of feces sampling. "We obviously have great skill in this area," Campbell said to laughter and general table pounding.
