Author: Barbara Dudley, Executive Director Greenpeace.
A campaign against HR 2823 and S 1420 (dubbed "The Dolphin Death Bill") and against Greenpeace waged by Alexander Cockburn in The Nation (August 12, 1996), Sea Shepherds Conservation Society and Earth Island Institute among others, was misleading and deliberately misrepresented our position. Since The Nation printed a Sea Shepherds attack ad and has not yet printed my letter of response (sent August 28, 1996), it became imperative to by this ad and present the fact once and for all.
WHY GREENPEACE SUPPORTED THIS LEGISLATION:
These bills would extend protections for dolphins to 11 other nations.
The current unilateral U.S. embargo is precisely that, unilateral, and
provides more protection for tuna processing giants like Heinz, Starkist,
and Bumblebee than for dolphins. We firmly believe that the international
agreement we supported would have resulted in far fewer dolphin deaths
than the current embargo, and would have given us a more honest and meaningful
"dolphin-safe" label - no dolphin mortalities. The current label
scheme doesn't guarantee that. It only guarantees that one method of tuna
fishing - encirclement - was not used in one region - by a small percentage
of the world's fleet.
Throughout the GATT and NAFTA debates, Greenpeace argued that the U.S. tuna/dolphin legislation should be replaced with an international agreement which would bind all the countries which fish for tuna in the Eastern Tropical Pacific.
Greenpeace was, and continues to be, opposed to both NAFTA and GATT because we believe they are licenses for multinational corporations to plunder the planet, exploit workers and destroy our environment with impunity. That opposition, though, does not mean we oppose global environment agreements. To the contrary - Greenpeace has worked for many such agreements over our 25-year history - on whaling, driftnets, Antarctica, ocean dumping, nuclear testing, hazardous waste trade, etc. We see these agreements as endangered by the economic imperatives of GATT and NAFTA.
Greenpeace is an international organization with offices in Mexico and throughout Latin America. Throughout the NAFTA battle, Greenpeace pushed its allies to avoid the Mexico bashing that was so seductive to the anti-NAFTA forces. To oppose the global corporate agenda without falling prey to jingoism and racism was essential for Greenpeace.
Cockburn on the other hand seems restrained by no such scruples. To imply that all Mexican tuna fishermen are "narco traffickers" was offensive and more worthy of Pat Buchanan or Lyndon LaRouche. It would have seemed more like Cockburn to ask why the Heinz corporation is suddenly so enthusiastic about saving dolphins, and why the Seafarers International Union, the Fishermen's Union of America, the United Industrial Workers, and the Maritime Traders Department of the AFL-CIO side with Greenpeace on this issue.
The anti-Greenpeace ad led with the statement that almost alone among activist groups, Greenpeace supports a legalized return to the capture and killing of dolphins in tuna nets..." What the ad failed to mention was that "almost alone" happens to include World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense Fund, National Wildlife Federation, and Centre for Marine Conservation, all of whom agree that ratification of the twelve nation international agreement is the best step to reduce dolphin mortality.
Greenpeace has tried to take the high road in this debate, explaining why we think the international agreement we supported was better for dolphins than the current U.S. embargo. But we have been consistently and irrationally attacked by Cockburn and the Earth Island Institute.
Earth Island Institute takes hundreds of thousands of dollars form Starkist, Bumblebee and other tuna companies to "monitor" the "dolphin-safe" label. Greenpeace accepts no corporate donations of any kind.
This was not an easy issue for Greenpeace. We knew that by doing what was most likely to reduce dolphin mortality worldwide, we would be vulnerable to cheap shorts from those who would simplify and mischaracterize a very complex issue. We would not risk the good will of the public whose support we depend upon unless we knew that what we were doing would protect more dolphins, and would better protect the entire ocean ecosystem.
If you would like more information on the issue, we would be happy to
oblige. Call us at 1-800-326-0959.