The activists make it nec essary for the whalers to use physical force in order to stop them. Their camera crew was carefully instructed right up to the point when it came to a scuffle. There was every indication that the pictures of physical confrontation were the real reason for their action,” says Broch to the Harpoon.
removing harpoon gun
In the summer of 1994 Greenpeace showed that they were wiling to destroy the whalers’ equipment in order to stop them. They boarded the whaling boat Senet and tried to remove the harpoon gun with tools they had brought with them. They told the media they were going to give it to a whaling museum. For the first time the activists were not served coffee, but were thrown overboard instead, life-jackets and all.
“We had to step in,” says Senet skipper Arvid Enghaugen. “we couldn’t stand by passively watching these campaigners destroy valuable equipment. They could easily have endangered lives; the harpoon gun was loaded. Later they cut the harpoon line to a dying whale.”The activists were determined that the whalers should not profit from the death of this whale”, stated the Greenpeace press release. Not only did they succeed in this, but they also managed to prolong the suffering of the whale.
Last summer Greenpeace frogmen stood on the dock in Tromsø preparing to go down to put a chain around the propeller on a whaling boat, but were prevented by the police.
In Ålo, Greenpeace activists were once again thrown into the water or back ashore when they forced their way on board 4 whaling boats at the dockside. The whalers hosed them with water and one of them hit the demonstrators with rubber hosing. “We couldn’t let them on board. We were afraid that they would destroy the meat in the hold or important equipment on board” the skipper of one of the boats, Oddvar Nilsen Husa tells the Harpoon. But the 30 Greenpeace demonstrators did not respect the whalers’ demand to stay ashore.
creating fear
“They make it impossible for the whalers to defend their property without resorting to physical violence,” says Broch. He says that the activists are extremely well disciplined and it appears as if their strategy is carefully planned. “They go right ahead like lemmings and push people aside. As soon as the whalers lay a hand on them to stop them they shout “Stop! This is a peaceful demonstration”, says Broch. But as the whalers let go of them in response to this cry, they just go on.
“They say one thing and do another. And the whalers have no idea what the activists are going to do and what their the purpose of the action is. This creates fear. There were rumours that they had acid with them to destroy the meat with”, says Broch. Broch is carefull to point out that he was not an neutral and passive observer of the event, but helped the whalers to keep the activists of the boat.
don’t want violence
“It’s difficult not to get angry when the same person you have thrown ashore keeps coming back again and again,” says Oddvar Nilsen Husa. He stresses that the whalers do not want to resort to violence. But he still doesn’t think that the whaler who hit out with the rubber hosing went too far. “It’s just the same as if someone breaks into your house. You must be allowed to try to stop them. Husa believes that the demonstrators put both themselves and the whalers in danger. “If someone fell during a struggle they could easily be badly hurt. There are a lot of sharp edges you can hit your head on.”
“It is extremely regrettable that we were attacked and some were beaten. We just want to demonstrate against whaling and encourage a debate about it”, stated the spokeswoman for Greenpeace Norway, Karin Glatz Brubakk, to the Norwegian media after the action in Ålo was over. She claimed that concern for the safety of their own people forced them to withdraw.” Glatz Brubakk was the only one from Greenpeace Norway who took part; most of the others were from Greenpeace Germany or elsewhere.
in breach of own principles
“Greenpeace embraces the principle of non-violence, rejecting attacks on either people or property,” states the Greenpeace annual report from 1992-1993. But harpoon guns and harpoon lines are perhaps not recognized as property?
The Harpoon has asked two of the Greenpeace representatives at this meeting, John Frizell and David McTaggert, to give a comment on their policy of non-violence, but both turned their backs on us. A third, Gerald Leape, said that there had been no change of Greenpeace policy in this area, but denied to answer whether he thought cutting harpoon lines and stealing harpoon guns was a violation of current policy.