About the high north alliance

	HIGH NORTH ALLIANCE N-8390 Reine i Lofoten, Norway. Tel.: (+47) 76 09 24 14. E-mail:hna@hna.no
Leseren har ikke støtte for innebygde rammer, eller er konfigurert til ikke å vise innebygde rammer.
IWC Survival Kit and Hot Issues
High North News 12.06.2006
The International Whaling Commission (IWC) meets in St. Kitts and Nevis 16-20 June, 2006. The High North Alliance IWC survival kit puts the facts at your fingertips (http://www.highnorth.no/iwc2006/). Armed with this, you will know what it’s all about, and what it all means.
Hot issues Who decides? What do they decide? For more than two decades, the answers to these questions have been fairly simple: Those that do not fancy whaling have been in control, they think whaling should stop, and have done everything they can to reach that objective. Things aren’t that straight forward any longer. The IWC appears to have come to a turning point. Not long ago, only about 20 countries cared to attend meetings of the IWC; now almost 70 countries put IWC on top of their travel agenda. The number of member nations to the IWC continues to increase, some join the pro-sustainable camp, others join the anti-camp. The latest newcomers are Cambodia, The Marshall Islands, Guatemala and Israel. For the first time since the 1970s, the conservationists now outnumber the protectionists; the whalers have more friends than enemies. But that’s only on paper. Not surprisingly, accusations of vote buying, briberies and coercion are flying back and forth. In particular they are thrown at Japan. And amongst those throwing the allegations are groups that were indeed involved in actual vote buying to get the numbers required for bringing about the whaling moratorium decision in 1982. Paper tigers are different than real tigers. For many reasons the High North Alliance believes that the pro-whaling camp will be unable to sustain a simple majority at the IWC. But if they are able to sustain a majority, we don’t believe it will really matter. Let’s explain: First of all, the other side (also known as anti-whalers, animal rightists, protectionists, whale huggers, the like minded, etc) must have some cards up their sleeves. After all, this is an anticipated situation. It is something they have been crying wolf about for many years. Secondly, the act of voting is far from evident. The voting procedure is often very complicated, sometimes making it hard for delegates to sort out whether it is in fact a “yes” vote or a “no” vote that conveys their opinion. Will all pro sustainable whaling governments be inside the meeting room at the same time? Will they all be allowed to vote? To be allowed to vote requires proper credentials, that is, formal papers from the government, and no unpaid membership fees. Thirdly, real politics. The race is so tight that the High North Alliance believes the most probable is a changing majority. Real politics in the IWC means that one country may suddenly get new instructions. Another country may suddenly disappear from the meeting venue without any apparent good reason –if you are not there you don’t have to pick side. A country that still owes a few pennies of the membership dues is not eligible to vote; thus free from all the hassle, no obligation to make up its mind. New members may also join during the meeting. Last but not least, even if the pro sustainable whaling camp should be able to sustain a majority, the High North Alliance believes that it won’t really matter when it comes to substance. Most whales will still continue to swim in the oceans, and some whales will also in the future end up on people’s dishes around the world. Even tough decisions on substance, such as whaling quotas, require a 75% majority; much fun could be done with a 50% majority. However, since the pro-whalers have been so intimidated for several decades, we very much doubt that they will seize the day. We do not think there will be any real airing or re-arrangement. The end result of all this is, we believe, a greater willingness to find workable compromises for the future. Those that have been ruling will realise that compromise is the only way they can have influence, and the have been ruled will be happy to note that their adversaries will give them something, no matter how tiny it is. Positioning has finished. In such an atmosphere, negotiations will calm down; a solution will be found, with less yelling from the trenches. One year ago, the High North Alliance wrote here: “You will not hear it this year, but one day perhaps: This was the best we could achieve, it’s not perfect. But if we hadn’t compromised anything, the outcome would have been much worse.” In 2006 we can say: That day is approaching rapidly. It is not a development the High North Alliance welcomes, simply because we do not think it will benefit coastal people and communities dependent upon the conservation and sustainable utilisation of the whale resources. But at the end of the day, we do not think there will be a lasting majority change. We think the anti-whalers will block it; perhaps not this year, but at the latest next year.
IWC 2006 Survival Kit
printer friendly version