The annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) started today by adopting the so-called Berlin initiative on conservation.

“We have witnessed the concept of conservation being hijacked by protectionists. Conservation is a means to enable sustainable whaling. This proposal was not about conservation but protectionism and animal rights,” says Stefan Asmundsson, Iceland’s Commissioner to the Whaling Commission, to the High North News.

The initiative means the creation of a conservation committee in the IWC to deal with issues such as whale watching, by-catch, small cetaceans, scientific whaling, environmental issues, behavioural research, etc.

After a lengthy debate with passionate interventions on both side, the resolution was adopted with 25 votes in favour and 20 against. Grenada chose to not participate in the vote as it found the procedure followed as illegal.

Denmark, one of the strongest opponents, argued that the proposal was outside of the Whaling Commission’s mandate. Denmark also had serious concerns regarding the legal contradictions contained in the proposal.

Australia’s Minister of Environment, Dr David Kemp, openly admitted that the Berlin initiative was about changing the scope of the Whaling Commission’s work. Dr Kemp said that this proposal “marks a milestone in the evolution of the IWC”. And referring to the de facto transition that Whaling Commission has been subjected to in the last decades, he said that this “transition should be consolidated”. He looked forward to see the “promotion of sanctuaries” by the new conservation committee.

Countries such as Japan and Norway presented views that this new initiative would serve to strengthen the division within the Whaling Commission, and exacerbate the conflict that has plagued the organisation for a long time. They also formally reserved their right to not participate in the committee nor to contribute financially.

One effect of this pronounced division in the IWC, and the continued distancing from the organisation’s primary objective, which is to manage sustainable commercial whaling, is that the whaling nations may now start to consider other options on how to manage their whaling activities.

“It is time for the whaling nations to realise that the Whaling Commission does not have the intention to take up its responsibility and resume the management of sustainable whaling. It is time to look for other alternatives outside of this dysfunctional organisation,” says Rune Frovik, secretary to the High North Alliance.