IWC's Adelaide Meetings: The 52nd Meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC 52) held this past July in Adelaide, Australia was remarkable for its orchestrated political theatrics, not the substance of its debates. Despite pleas from individuals, nations, NGOs, and organizations such as CITES that IWC resolve its decades old impasse on implementing a global whale and whaling management program, the deadlock continued. Instead of resolving alleged conflicts credited with keeping the Revised Management Scheme (RMS) and Revised Management Procedure (RMP) from passage, the delegates became engrossed over whether or not to create a South Pacific Whale Sanctuary. IWC 52 did spotlight the obstructionist strategy of the so-called "Like-minded" anti-whaling nations. The worldwide moratorium on whaling, as observers of IWC well know, was imposed in 1982 under the rationale of giving IWC scientists time to gather data on whale stock numbers. The 1990 deadline for lifting the "temporary" whaling ban has come and gone. Not only has the "Like-minded" faction refused to lift the moratorium, it has also raised a loud international protest over legitimate efforts by nations like Japan pursuing the research IWC and even "Like-minded" nations say is so badly needed. Central to the anti-whaling coalition's stalling tactics is the procedural ploy of offering "improvements" to the RMP, such as the RMS, that languish due to inaction by the IWC for years. At Adelaide, a Resolution calling for a timely completion of the RMS found yet one more technical anchor appended to it.
Meanwhile, the push for a South Pacific Whale Sanctuary was seen as yet one more piece of the crazy quilt strategy by Like-minded nations to declare all the oceans no-kill zones for whales. Once completed, the need for a global whale and whaling management system would be moot. The theatrics surrounding the push to create the South Pacific Sanctuary were impressive. Youngsters demonstrating outside the IWC venue singled out sustainable use delegates with uncanny precision. Obviously prompted by rally organizers, the "pro-sanctuary" youth challenged the mettle of pro-whaling delegates and observers with rude accusations of being "cruel barbarians" and "murderers" and of engaging in "vote buying." Inside the IWC conference room, an impressive array of high-ranking officials led the effort to create the new sanctuary. Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom delegations were headed by a star-studded array of dignitaries: Australia's Minister of Environment, Robert Hill, New Zealand's Minister of Environment MS Lee, and the United Kingdom's Minister of Fisheries, Elliot Morely. The trio urged creation of the sanctuary to "enhance protection and conservation of whales," "allow for scientific research to be conducted," and to "help in developing whale watching." Each a noble objective, but neither can be enhanced by a sanctuary. Meanwhile, their respective
delegations and their allies among the NGO community were less than noble in
attempts to discredit opponents of the sanctuary. A jarring attack was launched
against Caribbean nations as having sold their votes to Japan in exchange for
Japanese foreign aid. (see story below) Ironically, it was Australia, with
threats of reducing foreign aid, that was seen as the force behind the
withdrawal of the pro-sustainable use delegation from the Solomon Islands. |
||||||||||
 |
IWMC World Conservation Trust |