Everything seemed to be working out fine for the whalers. Used to gazing at distant horizons, in the distance they had caught a glimpse of a future without the IWC — a future in which whaling quotas were set by regional management bodies with a genuine interest in sustainable management.
And following a meeting of CITES this summer, at which a majority of nations saw no reason to exempt whales from the principle of sustainable use, they saw in the far distance the chance of resuming exports — albeit with the tightest of market controls.
And after years of abuse in the Western media, their files of press clippings were beginning to swell with balanced and informed reports about whaling. The Save-the Whale movement, once the greenest leaf on the environmental tree, had achieved its goal, and seemed in the process of withering and falling — albeit ungracefully — to earth.
Then a dark cloud appeared on the horizon — the Compromise.
Suspicious Smell
From the whalers’ point of view, this Irish initiative smells suspiciously
like another dictate in the making, along the lines of the Southern Ocean
sanctuary, to be crafted, rammed through the IWC, used as a stalling tactic,
or whatever, by a small clique of influential nations. The Compromise proposal
does not smell like an altruistic attempt to achieve a workable peace between
the whalers and anti-whalers, but like a compromise between the various
tents in the anti-whaling camp. Fearing — and with justification —
that the whalers were about to weigh anchor and cast off, they now seek
to bind us fast to the IWC.
No matter how the proposal’s supporters may try to dress it up during this week’s IWC, it is borne of the same school of thought once described as being «to make whaling legal, but impossible». Nowhere has this strategy been more manifest than in the theatrical antics of anti-whaling nations in blocking finalisation of the inspection and observation scheme.
Theatrical Performance
The whalers have sat through this theatrical act, and countless others
in the same play, for so long that when someone says the curtain is coming
down, their eyes roll in disbelief. Their legs have gone to sleep, their
bladders are bursting, the last bus left hours ago, and now they are to
believe that the final act is under way?!? A Compromise?
On stage, New Zealand, Australia and the UK have taken farce to new heights as they compete to out-do one another in their opposition to whaling. So much so that for whalers to believe any discussions on the Compromise are sincere, these countries must first step aside. How can they hope to be taken seriously while engaging in the formulation of rules for a catch to which they are religiously opposed?
But they will never step aside, because they are more interested in the politics of symbols than in results. They will continue to posture to their voting publics as steadfast champions of the whales, act indignant if more whales are killed, and take the credit if they are not. Just how many whales are killed is almost a secondary consideration.
The UK has already begun its posturing. Agriculture and Fisheries Minister Elliot Morley has said that the government remains «in principle» opposed to commercial whaling, but «is prepared to consider the case for limited whaling for local consumption ... if it leads to a significant and permanent reduction in the number of whales currently being killed each year.» Expect Australia and New Zealand to strike similarly silly postures this week.
Consolation Bone
If the hard-core anti-whalers were genuinely interested in minimising these
catches, rather than stopping them altogether, they would not hesitate
to force the compromise upon the whalers. After years of pushing for the
adoption of the RMS, how could Norway and Japan justify to the world why
they should now leave the IWC? The anti-whaling nations could offer them
minimal quotas — a consolation bone — and their complaints would
fall on deaf ears.
But the hard-core anti-whalers know the whalers cannot accept this Compromise. They know that Japan will not abandon its pelagic whaling ambitions to have access to its coastal minke stock. It has already turned down several clandestine offers from the US for just such a trade-off. Why should it accept now?
They know that Norway has no interest in abandoning its hopes of resuming exports of whale products.
And they know that both Japan and Norway will find it extremely difficult to accept a ban on whaling in international waters, when both have stressed that the IWC’s decisions must be in accordance with the purpose of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.
Ireland may very well be sincere in its bid to achieve a Compromise, but most of its supporting players will not. They will offer this olive branch, wait for it to be refused, and cast themselves once more in the role of heroes ... no matter how many whales are killed in the process.
As they say, plus ça change, plus c’est la même
chose.
See also "Ireland bids for Nobel Peace Prize"
and Harpoon Cartoon.