OUTRAGE OVER WHALING ... #2 <cont>

@georgeob1,

Aw...be fair. Rob has made it quite clear that knucklehead, for him, is a major compliment!

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

if I declare a pig sanctuary in the United States that doesn't make it illegal to eat pig

That settles it, You dont really understand the concept of "sanctuary".
You may eat pig, just not kill it and eat it in the sanctuary itself. As ridiculous as you wish to make this sound, you have touched on the concept of international sanctuaries witthout realizing it.
The UN has created several "butterfly" snactuaries , the closest being Mexico and Costa Rica where Monarchs overwinter and they are being threatened by logging and "resewrch specimen hunting"
We have several elk and bison sanctuaries in Europe and US and CAnada. Galapogos is supposed to be one for species identified in a "international natural treasures"
The Sea of Cortez is being looked at to become a sanctuary for several species besides the Pacific Blue Whale.
SO your example actually clarifies how international sanctaries do already exist.

Quote:

I think the Minke is the target species, they knew the science would show a small catch was sustainable so they invoked the sanctuary (without the required scientific evidence for doing so) to prevent it.

The Southern Ocean Sanctuary was established in 1979 which predates the recent kerfuffle. The increased killing of Minkes has NOT been established as being susttainable (YOU BLAME ME FOR TRYING TO STICK WITH SINGLE POINTS YET YOU DONT ADD ANYTHING NEW TO YOUR "WELL< LETS SAY THE MOON IS MADE OF GREEN CHEESE" ARGUMENT). Noone has established that killing OR NOT KILLING has any science behind it yet. IWC has been calling for it and the only rational data is the genomic data that is already showing evidence of genetic bottlenecking (see above article posted by dadpad) even in Minkes. Gene flow presumes a free flow of genetic information among several freely interbreeding populations. What the present activity seems to be leading to is a series of subspecies of Minkes all supported by whaling. This very thing is being noted in swordfish that have been fished(even though the greeding rate and population size of swordfish far exceed that of Minkes)

0 Replies

Same story. From two usually very reliable sources.
Story # 1, from the ABC.
Dare one hope? :

Quote:

Rudd issues whaling court action deadline
By North Asia correspondent Mark Willacy, staff
Updated 8 hours 22 minutes ago/ABC

Clashes: Sea Shepherd anti-whaling ship the Bob Barker in a scrap with Japanese whaling ship the Yushin Maru 3 earlier this month (Institute of Cetacean Research )

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has promised he will launch court action against Japan by November if it does not agree to stop slaughtering whales in the Southern Ocean.

The Government has been accused of backing away from its election campaign pledge to take Japan to the International Court of Justice.

Japan's Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada will arrive in Australia tomorrow for talks and there is some speculation a compromise proposal is on the cards, which might see Japan scale back Antarctic whaling in exchange for a return to commercial whaling in its own waters.

But Tokyo's former whaling commissioner, Masayuki Komatsu, is urging Mr Okada to drop the usual Japanese niceties and to use tough language in negotiations with the Rudd Government.

Mr Komatsu is a rarity in Japanese public life. A man who is not afraid to speak his mind, he once described minke whales as the "cockroaches of the sea".

But this month, Japan's Fisheries Minister revealed he was thinking of scaling back so-called research whaling in the Southern Ocean, in exchange for the resumption of commercial whaling in Japanese coastal waters.

Nicola Beynon, from the Humane Society International, says that would be a very dangerous compromise for whales.

"It would probably end up seeing more whales being killed in the long run," she said.

"Japan has been whaling in defiance of the moratorium on commercial whaling for over 20 years now and they should not be rewarded for doing that by being allowed to continue whaling in Antarctica, and being allowed to have a new category of whaling - so called coastal whaling - in their own waters."

For once, it seems the pro and anti-whaling lobbies agree.

Mr Komatsu says a Japanese retreat from Antarctic waters would be a decisive victory for the militant Sea Shepherd conservation group.

"Our minister said that they are going to retreat from Antarctica, Sea Shepherd must be happier," he said.

"So I don't think what Japan is doing, or considering, is appropriate."

While Mr Rudd is sweating on a diplomatic solution to the whaling stalemate, he has told Channel Seven there is now a deadline for court action if the Japanese refuse.... <cont>

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/19/2824307.htm

1 Reply

@msolga,

Story # 2
From the BBC today.
(Lots of other useful information on whaling at the link site.):

Quote:

Australia tells Japan: Stop whaling or face court

The Ady Gil with its bow sheared off after its collision with the Shonan Maru 2, background - 6 January 2010

Australia has set a deadline for Japan to stop whaling in the Southern Ocean by November this year, or face international legal action.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said he was still hopeful that talks with Japan would lead to a voluntary halt.

Japan's Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada is to visit Australia this weekend.

Despite a 1986 international moratorium on commercial whaling, Japan kills hundreds of whales each year, ostensibly for scientific research.

Blunt talk

Mr Rudd told the Channel 7 TV station that Australia would "work with the Japanese to reduce, through negotiation, their current catch to zero".

If we don't get that as a diplomatic agreement, let me tell you, we'll be going to the International Court of Justice

"If that fails - and I'm saying this very bluntly... - if that fails, then we will initiate that court action before the commencement of the whaling season in November 2010."

Australia has made such threats before but correspondents say the timing and assertive tone of this statement - coming just one day before Mr Okada is due to visit - gives the words added weight.

The BBC's Nick Bryant in Sydney says Mr Rudd has been criticised for backing away from an election promise to take international legal action against Japan for its annual whale hunt in the Southern Ocean.

Mr Rudd is currently slipping in popularity polls and faces an election this year.

"Now, that is a direct honouring of the commitment I gave to the Australian people. And that is the right [way] to handle it with a friend and partner, Japan, which is also a very significant, long-standing economic partner as well," he said.

"That's the bottom line and we're very clear to the Japanese that's what we intend to do."

Our correspondent notes that international legal action also carries risks. If the prosecution fails, legal experts say it might embolden the Japanese to expand its activities. ...<cont>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8523328.stm

0 Replies

The International Court has neither compulsory jurisdiction nor the means to enforce its judgements. PM Rudd's gestures are a palliative to ease indignationamong some Australians, but will likely do little to alter the Japanese views of the matter.

However, Australia could always declare war.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Yes, Australia could declare war, George. (You've said that before. Neutral

)

But both sides have a bit of face saving to do over this whaling issue. On their respective domestic fronts, say nothing of the larger, more important issues.

Kevin Rudd (Australian Prime Minister/Australian Labor Party) promised, prior to the Australian 2007 federal election, to do this. Time is running out for him with another election coming up this year. He's lost quite a credibility over this issue & he's be feeling the pressure.

Meanwhile Japan has the Tokyo Two court case to contend with. Involving exposure of corruption in the Japanese whaling industry. They are not going to look too wonderful as all the relevant information comes out. Poo on their faces, I'd say. Say nothing of UN human rights violations of the Tokyo Two, who exposed the corruption in the industry for GreenPeace.

So there are definitely some "vested interests" involved here, I'd say. I'd post more information, but right now I'm in the middle of cooking dinner.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

However, Australia could always declare war.

That's pretty damned silly. This issue does not rise to that level of brinksmanship. Japan (and Norway in similar situations) is simply playing the bully and attempting to bulldoze its way to getting what it wants. That is not, however, justification for a declaration of war. It is also not realistic to belittle efforts (for however ineffective you claim them to be) to resolve this matter through an international tribunal. Such tribunals have been created precisely because nations have no business going to war over such matters.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

It's just George who says such things. He's said it before, Setanta. Pay no attention. It means nought.

2 Replies

@msolga,

Planet Green is having a special series on the "Whale Wars". I hope, by producing the programs for prime time cable, that the film teams and producers dont go for sensationalism exclusively.

Ive just Fininished reading THE WHALE by phillip Hoare. It recounts the recent development of whaling by several nations including Japan. It was the British and The US in post WWII who "armed" the Japanese to venture further out and develop a big whaling fleet in an effort to , as MacCarthur stated ''Be able to feed your nation in a time of need"

The AUstralians were steadfast in there opposition to the entire venture and volunteered cattle for food . The Australians and the US were at odds about this at that time .The US was accused of shortsightedness since the Japanes whaling industry had been aboriginal in its entire history and was actually a limited resource for royalty and the elite. As whales became a commodity , their hunting became more mechanized and their "entitlement" attitude , wrt whales and whaling,became more entrenched.

.

1 Reply

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

It's just George who says such things. He's said it before, Setanta. Pay no attention. It means nought.

Not true. I certainly don't believe the issue merits a declaration of war. However, neither do I see any prospect of the resolution of this issue through the international court (Nor do I believe the court will accept jurisdiction, since Japan is, in fact, in compliance with the specific provisions of a convention, knowingly accepted and signed by all the parties, Australia included),

My post was instead intended to point out that this is - as Msolga inferred - an issue of domestic politics in Australia, and PM Rudd's actions are merely gestures intended to calm a domestic political storm. They mean naught.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Ive just Fininished reading THE WHALE by phillip Hoare. It recounts the recent development of whaling by several nations including Japan. It was the British and The US in post WWII who "armed" the Japanese to venture further out and develop a big whaling fleet in an effort to , as MacCarthur stated ''Be able to feed your nation in a time of need"

The AUstralians were steadfast in there opposition to the entire venture and volunteered cattle for food . The Australians and the US were at odds about this at that time .The US was accused of shortsightedness since the Japanes whaling industry had been aboriginal in its entire history and was actually a limited resource for royalty and the elite. As whales became a commodity , their hunting became more mechanized and their "entitlement" attitude , wrt whales and whaling,became more entrenched.

Sounds very interesting, farmer.

I must try an get my hands on a copy.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

We shall see what we shall see, George.

Who knows if it will ever actually get to court?

In the meantime, some very "interesting" negotiations between the Australian & Japanese governments will be going on.
Many of us here (in Oz) will be following developments very closely. It may well be a domestic issue for our prime minister in an election year, but it is something much more important to many of us. And our prime minister knows that.

1 Reply

@msolga,

Do you think the Japanese will simply cave in & give up because of a proposed legal action that they can simply refuse to acknowledge, and which therefore will stop on its own (there is no compulsory jurisdiction here)?

My guess is that the recently increased aggressiveness of the anti whaling activists will increase their resolve.

However your PM will be able to say he tried.

I have no objection to the effort, only to the notion that it is meaningful.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

The japanese population is increasingly showing that it is not fully behind the "research whaling". There still is bushido actively involved here. The Japanese may drive hard bargains but they understand points of honor quite clearly.
I think that this whole "industry" will become a cultural "Conestoga wagon wheel" issue in a generation or two. Most Japanese citizens have NEVER eaten a whale.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Do you think the Japanese will simply cave in & give up because of a proposed legal action that they can simply refuse to acknowledge, and which therefore will stop on its own (there is no compulsory jurisdiction here)?

I can't say yes or no to that question with any certainty, George. Early days. But I'm watching closely.

My guess, at this stage at least, is that there will be a serious attempt at some sort of resolution, by both sides, via these current negotiations. I see it in both government's interests to achieve this .

Quote:

My guess is that the recently increased aggressiveness of the anti whaling activists will increase their resolve.

I'd argue that there hasn't actually been an increase in aggression. The "whale wars" have been going on in the Southern Ocean every summer for quite a few years now. What would be motivating Kevin Rudd more, I think, is that this a a pretty important issue to quite a number of Australians, who expected a lot more from our government when they voted for them in 2007. (Polls would have told them this.) And now, with another election looming toward the end of this year, the Labor government has appeared to have done even less than the previous (conservative) government in resolving the ongoing "whaling issue". There appear to be a lot of very disenchanted young people (especially) with this government which promised so much (on this issue, climate change & other environmental concerns) but appears to have achieved very little progress.

1 Reply

From today's news. No fresh details, obviously:

Quote:

Japanese minister to question Rudd over whaling threat
Updated 4 hours 29 minutes ago/ABC news online.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd speaks to the media at Parliament House, Canberra

Japan's foreign minister says he will ask the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd about his threat to take Tokyo to the International Court of Justice over its whaling program, during a meeting in Sydney today.

Mr Rudd says Japan has until November to stop whaling or face legal action.

The Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada is the first official from the new Japanese government to visit Australia.

Mr Okada will make a courtesy call on Mr Rudd and will ask the Prime Minister about his ultimatum for Japan to stop whaling by November.

He says he wants to discuss the issue calmly.

Mr Okada will then travel to Perth for talks tomorrow about nuclear disarmament, climate change and defence ties with his Australian counterpart Stephen Smith.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/20/2825391.htm

0 Replies

It may well turn out that the Japanese have become embarassed by all this and may decide to change their stance. Howwever, I don't see anything in their past behavior in diplomatic disputes that suggests they'd easily change a firm position once taken. Moreover their new government doesn't appear strong enough to take such political risks. However, we shall see....

I believe the probability of a successful "legal" resolution of the issue through a suit in the world court is about nil.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Every day is a new day, George.

You never know what might happen.

We'll see what eventuates.

In my opinion, the Japanese have every good reason to be embarrassed & wouldn't be too keen on yet further publicity of their whaling activities, say nothing of the adverse publicity the government is likely to receive over the Tokyo Two case.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

The Japanese will do what is right after exhausting all other options.
They will try to save face in the future and grdually dcrease their catches until one day they will announce that their research is completed. ( I can hope they are a reasonable yet proud people)

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

The Japanese will do what is right after exhausting all other options.

That's how I see it, too, farmer.

(And I've noticed that they've virtually stopped using the "scientific research" justification. )

0 Replies

OUTRAGE OVER WHALING ... #2 <cont>

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know