The government of Iceland has commenced a scientific research-whaling program in its coastal waters. The purpose of the undertaking is to determine the size and health of the area's different cetacean populations with a view to determining whether Iceland can legitimately recommence the regulated commercial harvest of plentiful species, as it is legally entitled to do under the terms of its membership in the International Whaling Commission (IWC). Judging by the reaction of the US State Department's office of public affairs, Washington views this initiative as on a par with Reykjavik's formal enrollment in the axis of evil. Iceland has been roundly condemned and we are now informed that the Bush Administration is formally considering the imposition of economic sanctions on Iceland. Just where, exactly, does the US get off?

Push aside, for the moment, the question of the size of Iceland's whale stocks and their impact upon the nation's vital fisheries industry - we will return to these questions later. First, we must ask who appointed the US State Department the guardian of the world's whales? Where does the US discover the nerve to threaten economic reprisals against a democratic nation (and a much older democracy) for a decision taken with 75% popular support? Are Icelanders supposed to cease their popular consumption of whale meat on the US say so and, if so, is the US going to show similar rigor against those Alaskan citizens who each year harvest bowhead whales in the Beaufort Sea? The question is, of course, purely rhetorical.

Moreover, is this how the US should treat a nation that has been formally its ally since the very inception of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization? After all, only a few weeks have passed since the US humiliated the Icelanders with the Pentagon's unilateral announcement of US withdrawal from Keflavik Air Force Base, a piece of buffoonery that obliged its National Security Adviser to place several apologetic calls to Iceland's Prime Minister. Did the US enjoy that particular confrontation with the Norsemen that it needs to sally forth again so quickly to repeat the experience?

Before we all reach for our ecological smelling salts, let us also give some credit to the Icelanders for quite possibly having science on their side. The moratorium on commercial whaling has now been in place for over 20 years and the evidence of various research programs, including the IWC's own Scientific Committee strongly suggests that while some species such as right, blue and bowhead whales (the latter of which the US harvests) remain parlous. Many others such as the humpback, sperm and minke (the chief target of Japanese, Norwegian and Icelandic whaling) are resurgent to the point both where these species can easily be harvested in a regulated fashion and where they may be having a serious negative impact on regional fish foodstocks - cetaceans are healthy eaters and resolutely refuse to dine on turnips.

But, of course, Iceland is not asking that the world simply accept this science as given. Rather, it is engaging in a scientific research program to determine the validity or spuriousness of these concerns. But, so far as Washington is concerned, some questions simply are not supposed to be asked and certain lines of inquiry are never to be pursued. This makes for a somewhat hilarious contrast with the US position on genetically modified organisms (GMO's), where European and other potential customers are assured that US scientific investigation of GMO's has been so extensive that further scientific examination on their part, or even the most cursory labeling of GMO products, is quite unnecessary. Apparently, the questing scientific mind is to be praised when it serves US policy and condemned when it does not.

With the exception of Norway, which has and will maintain its own minke-whaling program, the nations of Western Europe will echo the US line. Synthetics have almost entirely replaced whale oil - the main purpose of the former US and European whaling programs - while Iceland, Japan and Norway alone have a domestic tradition of consuming whale meat. But do not expect to hear similar European threats of economic sanctions against Reykjavik or, for that matter, Tokyo or Oslo. Europeans just do not accept that global bullying is always the optimal path to a desired end.

Iceland intends to conduct research whaling and the US does not want it to. Well, it is an imperfect world and none of us get our own way on everything, particularly when we are dealing with elected democracies who enjoy the strong support of their electorate. The more the US insists upon behaving like the spoiled brat of global politics and threatening dire actions against any nations that frustrate it on even the most minor matter, the more it will undermine its standing with its friends and allies - even when they smile in its face.