The purpose of this paper is to discuss the intense battle on an increasing number of international arenas over what principles and approaches shall guide the management of whales. The broad question is: should whales be utilized like other marine living resources or should they be protected to the largest extent possible? As a point of departure this may seem like a question over values, and to some extent it is. The significance of values and norms in guiding behaviour in the international society should not be disregarded. Still, usually they have to be reinforced by other factors to have a decisive impact. In this paper I will discuss these basic values in relation to knowledge, interests and power¹. In line with the traditional realist assumption in the study of international relations, I will argue that the reason the preservationist approach has prevailed over the last two decades is because it has been in line with the interests of the most powerful players in the international system, most notably the US. Still, in line with a more novel approach to the study of international relations, I will argue that over time the significance of the more soft and diffuse aspect of knowledge cannot be disregarded. More recently, this latter aspect has been on the side of pro-whaling forces as there is no longer any doubt that certain species may be harvested sustainably.

A characteristic feature since the early 1970s is that this battle has spread to an increasing number of international arenas. In part this is a result of political strategic linking of the issue. That is, the contenders have seen in their interest to raise the issue on other arenas, or create new arenas in order to strengthen their cause. In part, this is a characteristic feature of a broader trend in international society where new and important functional inter-linkages are discovered². This is a result of the broader ecosystems understanding that has become more prominent over time. In the battle over the management of whales, there has mostly been strategic linking as the contending forces have used new arenas in attempts to strengthen their cause. Initially the anti-whaling forces were most successful with this approach, but the picture has changed gradually over time.

Before we take a closer look at the history of whaling and the significance of new international arenas, let us first identify closer some of the finer nuances within the two major approaches, starting by what may be somewhat simplified labelled as the anti-whaling side. Broadly speaking, three groups that can be identified in this camp as being either a) against all whaling, or b) it should be conducted only by certain exclusive groups and a final group is c) either questioning the scientific justification of whaling or fear that it will once more become a large scale industry if it is reopened. Overall, these groups advocate complete protection of all whales or an extreme precautionary approach.

The argument of the first group (animal right groups and some 'fundamentalist' countries like the U.K., Australia and New Zealand) is that marine mammals in general and cetaceans in particular are special creatures that should not be managed according to the same principles as other marine living resources. They are intelligent and beautiful and therefore need to be protected. Whales should be watched not utilized and consumed.