Dear Jennifer,
Greenpeace, Sea Shepherd and many Australians have urged the new Rudd government to send the Navy to the country’s self proclaimed Antarctic territory , which is not recognised by other nations and which include a Whale Sanctuary to stop Japanese whaling.
The Austraslian Prime Minister will decide this week, whether to send the Navy and the long range aircraft or not to gather evidence for a case in the International Court of Justice in the Hague.
Japan’s Fisheries Agency is confident of a victory with the Minister stating in an ABC radio interview : “We will not tolerate any moves to obstruct our research whaling program, which is approved under an international treaty. In light of these treaties, denying international whaling authorised by the international community is unacceptable.”
Australian international law specialist, Don Rothwell warned that naval patrols would breach the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, which deemed Antarctica to be a demilitarised zone, and possibly spark an international incident.
Greenpeace urges Forum Island Country governments party to CITES to make a formal protest about Japan’s killing of humpbacks under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) claiming “The Japanese government is breaching this international treaty on trade in endangered species with their plans to import humpback whale meat into Japan.”
According to the same report in www.scoop.co.nz, “The CITES Secretariat has the power to pressure Japan to not kill any humpbacks through issuing a written caution to Japan; sending public notification through the Secretariat to all Parties of the issue; notifying Japan that it is in non-compliance and request a compliance action plan, and finally recommend a suspension of trade with Japan in CITES listed species.”
Cheers,
Ann
In Sweden
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
More info here, although it’s from the highly ‘questionable’ source of the ABC (well, depends on what the ABC is reporting on and your views doesn’t it?):
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/18/2121384.htm
Why the hell we should care what Japan thinks when such respect is not reciprocated is beyond me. Bring on the warm jets.
Happy Christmas to you too Ann. Snuggle a wolverine for me.
Evidence gathered under conditions of breach of treaty, could possibly be ruled inadmissable in court action. Better to let Greenpeace continue to gather the evidence.
Western media reports have suggested that Australia will “spy” on the Japanese whaling fleet. I guess even friends will spy on each other, but if Australia were to ask the Japanese “are you catching whales in the area of the Antarctic seas that we in Australia have designated a sanctuary under Australian law?”, I don’t think the Japanese will deny it – they have been reporting such information to the IWC for years.
Shane McLeod suggests in the ABC radio piece that Japan’s policy does Japan’s “image significant damage in Australia”. And while he notes the issue has been getting more coverage here since the recent Aussie policy changes, he doesn’t go into specifics outside what officials have been saying.
Some J-blogs have been quite busy with this in the last week, basically all critical of Australia. Perhaps the harshest criticism I have seen is one comparing Australia to North Korea (for refusing to recognise international agreements to which it itself has adhered).
“settle down, mate” seems to be the general theme.
So we enter into undeclard aggression with Japan. Remind me how many whales will this save.
Indeed forget the saved whales just what will this achieve (apart from giving our ABC lots of emotin’ material and photo ops to show Kevvi in best Napoleonic stance.)
If tis issue cannot be won by having the world suppport our diplomatic efforts then move onto something else.
Pity they don’t torpedo the bastards.
When’s the last time the nips were so concerned about international law.
Don’t be so gutless guys.
Some excerpts from media:
“NEIL JAMES: Whilst the Navy would be unlikely to gather much more evidence than has already been gathered say by Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace, it would come from a more reputable source, and it would also demonstrate the Australian Government’s resolve in this regard”
“GILLIAN BRADFORD: The Defence Association’s Neil James though points out there could be complications in sending the Navy to spy on the whalers.
NEIL JAMES: Because if one of the Sea Shepherd vessels does something illegal under international law and the Japanese call on assistance from a shadowing Australian warship and that might place the Navy in quite an invidious position”
I doubt the SS and GP will stay in the Southern Oceans the whole whaling season, but this might be a possibility for the Navy?
It is also doubtful if the japanese will harpoon any humpbacks or Fin whales when they are monitored by the Navy???
David,
International law on the high seas stinks and is very hollow. My own opinion is that the Japanese ” scientific” whaling is a sham. They just ought to call it commercial like the Norwegians do.
Re fisheries , ” research ” fisheries usually is a scam as well, similar to ” scientific whaling”.
According to UNCLOS paragraph 13 it is permitted for foreign countries to conduct ” research” fishing in other nation’s EEZs , if they submit some kind of a research papers to some Institution/ University . Mostly it’s just commercial fishing with ZERO scientific value. I see similarities with whaling in this case.
In reality you’re most likely talking one vessel and maybe some flyovers – doesn’t sound like the Spanish Armada does it?
And “illegal” – well what the Japs are doing is “illegal” so let’s no get too precious here. Get the piccies and let’s take them to court.
The Japs of course doing no wrong should welcome the company and safety of other vessels in the area. Last time one of their boats caught fire – so you never know when bad things might happen.
Although if you were being sneaky and didn’t want anyone around …
Luke, have you got any academic qualifications in International Law, especially as it relates to Maritime activities in region that are not recognised as being part of the territory of a sovereign state?
Maybe you’ve authored a peer-reviewed paper on the subject???
… Or (and more likely) are you just continuing your parasitic nature and bludging off the efforts of others?
I don’t care whether Luke is or isn’t qualified to comment on this issue, but I do care that the tone and nature of his comments are increasingly nasty and in this instance deliberately racist.
So far only three people have ever had their IPs banned, but we may revise standards in the new year.
This all can be simplified somewhat by recognizing that Sea Shepherd is a criminal organization and that their ships may be sunk at anyone’s convenience.
Of course, room must be made in the brig or similar quarters for survivors who prefer to be hung for “crimes against humanity,” i.e., making fish, cephalopods, etc. more important than humans.
After the cretins drown, or are hung by an appropriate tribunal (I recommend Nuremberg), we might at least have safe passage on the high seas.
I’d say this would contribute to a sane discussion, but for some reason, people insist on including idiots in important discussions, citing “diversity,” “being inclusive,” etc., and so forth.
The idiots should establish their own political party. Oops, they have already. It’s the Greens.
Well the last poster here repeatedly makes highly insulting and tasteless comments, as does the likes of Ian Mott. It seems ok to wish death and destruction on environmentalists, urbanites and animals but not the Japanese/forestry officials/farmers/miners et al if you go through the archives here. Double standards? Nip the baiting by ALL in the bud, treat ALL equally and maybe some wouldn’t feel the need to be “increasingly nasty”. Maybe others might actually feel like participating more.
Apparently the Federal Government may be waiting for the outcome of the HSI case before making any firm decisions on what degree of action to take.
Libby,
Actually death *was* wished upon me once. But I think we all agreed to forget about all of that, and I’m not going to waste time bringing up further more recent examples. Let’s just stay on topic and hope others will do the same 🙂
If the FG is waiting for the HSI case before doing anything, it seems to suggest that they are looking to buy themselves some more time to think through how they are going to get themselves out of this policy mess they created for themselves through their populist electioneering tactics. The whole idea of gathering “evidence” of Japanese activities (which the Japanese themselves are providing documentation about to the IWC each year anyway) also reinforces the view that they haven’t got a clue what they are going to do next, but in the meantime are trying to seem like they are fulfilling an election promise. Anti-whaling fanatics probably should not hold their breath (although this dispute would be solved faster if they would).
Ann,
Whether one thinks it stinks or not, the law is the law, and any normal, civilized state must recognise them.
Both American and French officials have explicitly acknowledged Japan’s right to grant it’s nationals to conduct a programme under Article VIII of the ICRW, while stating their hope that Japan won’t conduct the programme anyway.
Rudd meanwhile has made comments about “no one believing the whaling is for research”. If so, I don’t know how they think they are going to prove that in a court by taking photos and films. And Rudd might also care to provide a motive why the J-Government would actually be conducting commercial whaling, not research whaling. What is it Kev, are they hard up for cash?
If the FG is serious about an international court case they should be clear about the timeframe for starting it.
David,
I was under the impression you received an apology or similar for the past comment. However, I dont know if you are under the delusion you have improved the tone with “Anti-whaling fanatics probably should not hold their breath (although this dispute would be solved faster if they would).”
The suggestion the FG was waiting on the HSI case was not made by the FG, but rather put to HSI by a journalist. She suggested it may be the case. Any opinion it is a “policy mess” and “that they haven’t got a clue what they are going to do next” is of course subjective.
Noun: racism
1. The prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races
2. Discriminatory or abusive behaviour towards members of another race
Noun: double standard
1. An ethical or moral code that applies more strictly to one group than to another
Libby,
Whether I got an apology for the death wish or simply decided to let it go is not something that needs be dredged up again here.
“fanatics”, for the record (do I really need say it?) does not include anyone participating here, unless anyone happens to be posting from for example, a Sea Shepherd vessel…
I was just reading the Aussie news and I see that some chap named Pyne saying “this smacks to me of Labor trying to get cheap headlines and being seen to be doing something about whaling rather than anything of any substance”.
So my opinion that this looks to be a policy mess and the Labor party haven’t got a clue what they are going to do next is at least shared by one other.
David,
There are many cases in the real world and in courts when an ” accused” is technically ” innocent” even if he has murdered one person. Yes, the law must be followed , but one must ask about the ethics and if you can rewrite the law.
Southern Oceans is a whale SANCTUARY and all nations except Japan voted for it. So it’s not completely honest/ right when they claim that the international community has authorized whaling in the Sanctuary, increasing quotas and including new species.
Some kind of compromise is needed IMO, but prowhalers like Rune, ask ” why should we compromise”.
We must understand that whaling in the ” Australian ” part of the Sanctuary sparks anger and to protect ” their” whales and not letting foreign ships intrude to “their” territory.
David – that’s what called an irrelevant comment from the party that has just been comprehensively defeated – now in what is called “the Opposition”. I don’t think you’ll find the Labor govt needs any huge amounts of good will at the moment – they’ve just been sworn in.
They are doing what most Australians want them to do. My views on the matter are really quite mild compared to many people I’ve spoken too. See intense anger !
Of interest that the outcome of any monitoring recommendation is likely to be Customs Vessel.
However there is a court case brewing as well.
“Any day now, the Federal Court will hand down a decision on whether the Government should enforce a ban on whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/18/2121927.htm
HELLO AGAIN,
Totally off topic, but I have found an extremely interesting article , called ” In vitro meat” —end to all cruelty in the animal world.”
In year 2020 meat will be cultivated artificially in a plant ( not factory farming). This project is obviously supported by NASA. This means that whaling etc could end???? Will perhaps write down the story and post it at Jen’s.
Engagement by an armed force of a foreign commercial ship in international waters could spark off a row that we dont want and cant win.
if you must send down an observation ship make it unarmed, the biggest weapon is public opinion
The so called ‘Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary’ has no legal standing, it is an agreement only and is in open waters. If Australia tries to physically enforce the SOWS they will do so without the law – they could be pirates
Ann,
There are also many real world cases when the accused is technically innocent when indeed they are innocent. The previous administration talking about not wanting to go to court because they might lose on a technicality. This is true, but then I believe they would probably lose anyway because I believe they are wrong and Japan is right in terms of the law.
And as for sanctuaries, we also know Article VIII is “Notwithstanding anything contained in [the ICRW]” so this argument is mute – but it is interesting to note that sanctuaries are supposed to be “necessary to carry out the objectives and purposes of [the ICRW]”, supposed to be “based on scientific findings” and also “take into consideration the interests of the consumers of whale products and the whaling industry.” Only 23 nations voted for the sanctuary, and they should all be ashamed of their behaviour. Japan voted against it, but Norway abstained (as did others) arguing that the action wasn’t in accordance with the ICRW. One would have to be very creative with the plain meanings of English words to argue otherwise.
It is completely honest / right to claim that the research whaling is authorized by the international community (until court rules otherwise), and there’s nothing at all in the law that suggests numbers can’t be increased or new species included.
The problem the anti-whalers have is not that Japan isn’t sticking to the rules, it’s that the rules don’t suit the anti-whalers, and because they were never designed to, it’s no surprise they don’t.
Compromises – yes I think that would be a fast way to find some kind of (at least partial) resolution to the issue, but Aussie amongst others rejected the opportunity when it was presented to them, and now they are planning to “spy” on their friends, the Japanese…
> We must understand that whaling in the
> ” Australian ” part of the Sanctuary sparks
> anger and to protect ” their” whales and not
> letting foreign ships intrude to “their” territory.
Australia’s making laws to cover areas of ocean that are not widely recognised as it’s own territory is entirely Australia’s problem. The solution is not to beg the Japanese to stop, the solution is to throw out the law which shouldn’t have been enacted in the first place.
David,
Well, that’s twice you’ve dregded it up again.
Regardless of anyone you label a ‘fantatic’ posting here, such comments are unnecessary and unhelpful. You would surely say so yourself should it be about a Japanese pro-whaler who some may label as ‘fanatical.’ Unless of course there are those double standards.
It is amusing that the now opposition, who sent the armed forces into Iraq armed with ample intelligence, scare-mongered us into thinking refugees in seives-at-sea threw their children overboard and had no qualms allowing the Customs vessel to pursue Patagonian toothfish poachers for weeks on end are now asking us to not put our trading partner offside, regardless of the fact Japan has no qualms about putting us offside by hunting whales that pass through our waters and are involved in a multi-million dollar tourism industry.
Let’s hope our Mandarin-speaking PM sees China as the trading partner it will be and Japan the disrespectful and cruel nation it is (with due respect to the Japanese who are either totally ignorant of what Japan does to animals or who oppose it).
Who was it said “the law is an ass”
As some here seem to find the f-word offensive, please accept my humble apologies. I will presume at least the humourous intent in suggesting the … ultra-enthusiastic(??) … anti-whalers holding their breath while waiting for the new govt. to do something significant, was recognised as such.
Travis,
Re the opposition, I think they are suggesting not only that Aussie might upset Japan (personally I don’t think anyone in Japan officialdom will take Aussie seriously, they understand Australia’s domestic circumstances), but that Aussie might do something illegal and also upset other nations.
> Japan the disrespectful and cruel nation it is
Hope you enjoy being friends with the Chinese instead, they are obviously spotless compared to the Japanese (maybe even a wrung above Aussie too!).
Luke,
So bring on the Aussie navy then, I personally can’t think of a worse move the anti-whaling bunch could pull right now.
What is the fundamental objection to killing whales? We do, after all, kill many other animals.
Is it because certain species of whales are low in number and are believed to be threatened? If so, what is the credibility of this data? Counting whales must surely be a difficult exercise.
I’ve eaten whale in Norway and in Iceland. It’s meat, unusually red but otherwise nothing special. (For that matter horse meat is red too and I’ve eaten that.)
Perhaps I should express my question in another way… what are the objections to hunting whale and what is their scientific basis?
You sound worried David.
What I can gather, John, is that some anti-whaling people think that whales are highly-intelligent sentient beings that live in closely-knit circles, much like you and I, and some other animals do not, or have been bred by humans specifically for food, which leaves them without such reason for exception (bad luck, I guess). Others object because the explosive harpoon killing method does not render every whale dead instantaneously, and it would probably still be inhumane even if the method was perfect in that respect. Another recent reason offered is that whales are watched by some people, and if they are killed by others in other parts of the world, it may negatively effect whale-watching profitability. Negative effects on whale-watching profitability are apparently unacceptable (whether real or not), but negative effects on whaling profitability is OK. It depends where you stand, but hey I get the impression you probably know all this right?!
I saw some complete whale steaks the other day in a local meat shop. Usually I’ve only seen the meat cut up into smaller pieces, and indeed seeing it in a big massive slab impressed upon me just how red the meat is (more so than horse I think, horse is quite good too actually).
Luke,
really 😉
Saw this information on the Icelandic Minke Whaler’s Aassociations website:
100 gram raw minke whale contains 113kcal/ 474 kJ
Well, objections John. People might find it unethical to eat meat that’s still on the IUCN Red List.
There are as well fears that whaling will expand, and once again bring whales near extinction.
On the ” positive” side of whale meat eating is that animals have lived a free range life, no forests have been cut down to feed the whales and no land degradation etc. This is what the High North Alliance points out.
Rant, rant, rant….maybe Travis we have better not to point out exclusively the Japanese as cruel to animals. In all countries we commit atrocities against animals.
For example: China ( bear bile farming, beating dogs to make meat tastier), our Western industrialized countries with factory farming. Take the EU for example, the farmers get more subsidies the longer the live animal transports are ( cruelty plus emissions, a total madhouse). The EU fisheries are as well one of the least sustainable in the world. Still they complain a hell of a lot on whaling. ( Iceland’s and Norway’s fisheries managements are much , much better, actually they are role models compared to the EU).
Hi, five comments have just been deleted from this thread. Pinxi was banned sometime ago from this site, but keeps changing his/her IP – so I have no alternative but to simply delete comment. No doubt my comment of 12.04pm prompted the response from him/her. As I commented at 12.04pm we would like the standard of discussion to have improved by the new year.
Rubbish SJT, the Antactic treaty prohibts military activity.
Any claims by Australia to territory in Antactica only apply to Australians, Australian law does not apply to non Australians.
As I was saying, as an election promise the ALP said that they would enforce the southern ocean whale sanctuary. Just how they will do this is a mystery as the sanctuary was brought about by the IWC, a body which has no power to legislate, is not based on international treaty and has no power or authority.
Frankly I think the Australian Government has far more important things to worry about than the dietry preferences of foreigners.
I think in the distant past a devout Bhuddist Japanese Emperor banned the consumption of the flesh of animals and back then whales were conveniently considered fish.
So after an expensive, fruitless attempt to coerce Japanese Bhuddhists to eat rump steak our Nanny Stateers will go on to waste even more of our hard earned on adverts for pork chops in Tel Aviv.
Surely they should be working out what they’re going to do to help our rural poor priced out of work by an increase in the minimum wage and shunned by employers wary of unfair dismissal laws.
Perhaps they intend to pay them ‘sit down money’ from the stamp duty on carbon trades.
I don’t much like the idea of people killing whales, but we Deep Greens believe in being scientifically rational. A vast consensus of scientists, we are told, have concluded that the world is getting inexorably warmer. Killing whales could be seen as mercy killing, before they die of heat exhaustion.
Further, every whale removed will lower the sea level. Only a smidgeon, granted, but every little helps. Try it in your bath, with a plastic duck. Think of the increase in krill biodiversity.
Can we look forward to an international conference to prepare a road-map for removing about a million whales each year, so stabilising sea-levels? Now where would be a good venue?
Perhaps Luke can make a Fortran (or Cobol) model, followed by some multi-variate analysis. It failed in psychology (1920s) and in ecology (1970s), but you never know, this might be the big one. A paper in Nature? “Eigenvectors reveal whale biodiversity linked to climate change through canonical correlations” or similar. Phew! Go Lukey Baby!
Bring back Pinxi. It might actually raise the standard for once.
Yes Ann, all countries have cruelty to animals, some even have a history of it towards other humans as well. However perhaps cruelty is in the eye of the beholder, much like fairness on this blog.
The standard of this blog will be raised when people give an informed opinion without insults and bad language. There will be more banned posters and deleted posts if things don’t improve immediately.
This blog is unusual from the point of view of allowing views we don’t necessarily agree with, unlike most others, which are largely ‘echo-chambers.’
The sooner pointless and cruel whaling is stopped, the better. I wonder when Japan will do medical ‘research’ by harpooning humans.
Hahaha, good one Paul 🙂
On Greenpeace’s website it is stated that Japan is planning to build a new factory ship, three times bigger than the current one.
Nisshin Maru has the capacity to carry 2000tons of whale meat the new one will have the capacity to carry 6000 tons of whale meat.
So it seems like the whaling nations have no plans at all to end whaling but are increasing quotas annually despite our protests.
New fresh blood is needed in the whaling debate…
.
Godzilla should attack a Japanese city for every whale caught.
Then we’d be asked to supply aid to help. No prisoners, no worries.
Mea culpa! As a child in England, just after World War 2, I ate whale meat. Nobody questioned it then, because we were very hungry. Do our ethics change according to whether our stomach is full or empty? Is it ethical to change your ethics according to circumstances? We Deep Green philosophers worry about these things.
Davey,
I have eaten twice whale meat in Norway, and in Sweden it was quite ” common” with whale meat before the moratorium.
We had actually quite fun with the Norwegian whale meat balls , beacause they ” disappeared” when they were fried ( almost only blubber).
Personally my ethics is ” don’t eat meat from animals that are on the IUCN Red List”
BTW, when I was Christmas shopping the other day I saw in Stockholm that one store sold brown bear meat! Now, that is something that I wouldn’t like to try….
Is the the final humiliation for whales in Japan? (With pictures)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=503232&in_page_id=1811
“It’s a scene that brings laughter and cheers from visitors to a Japanese aquarium – two white beluga whales wearing Santa hats.
“But environmentalists are saddened by the sight of what they say is the final humiliation for the whale in a country that hunts them down with harpoons.”
The horror.
I wouldn’t even put a Christmas hat on my dog , because he wouldn’t like this !
I’m totally opposed to using animals for human entertainment, can’t the silly crowd see that it’s not at all funny for the animals!
Well, thanks for this Norway, that you have banned dolphinariums because it’s unnatural for the cetaceans.
I wonder if Santa Claus will come to the Japanese whaling ship?
It’s a little bit strange to see the Japanese outfitted in Western Santa costumes. Are the tradional whale eaters as well wearing Santa costumes???
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/19/2122840.htm
Looks like a big cop out. I wonder if the Australian public will be satisfied:
“Mr Smith says instead of force, the Government would try to use diplomacy.”
Hey, what was the last government’s policy?
“… the Government expects to receive its legal advice early next year.”
I thought they already had legal advice prior to the election when they were hunting for votes??
“This is a surveillance activity … for the purpose of assessing the merits of taking an international legal case against the whaling.”
I wonder how anything that they might capture on video could be of use in assessing the merits of court action.
Perhaps the underlying intention is just to covertly assist Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace in finding the fleet so that they can go about their protest activities.
Some of the “Lance Corporals of Policy” on this thread need to remember that there are a whole host of non-military measures available to “sort out” upstart second order nations that are overcome by an excess of jingoism and self righteous hubris.
So if Uncle Kevvy thinks he can dapple in a bit of old style gun boat diplomacy he had best take a look at the way Anthony Eden was brought to heel with a bit of classic “exchange rate diplomacy” over the Suez Crisis in the 1950s.
You may think a bit of Galtieri style posturing makes good theatre for the punters but just remember how little it would take, especially in the current world financial circumstances and our own balance of payments conditions, to pay us back with a 28 cent Dollar that will really rattle your daggs.
But in a way, it may be a good thing. A bit of ignorant Aussie jingoism might be just what is needed to produce a re-emergence of a balanced Japanese military with power projection capabilities consistent with its economic weight.
*I’m totally opposed to using animals for human entertainment*
Bang goes dressage, showjumping, polo…
*I’m totally opposed to using animals for human entertainment*
Bang goes dressage, showjumping, polo…” – rog
Well, I’m not keen on using wild animals.
It might be a little different with horses, a little dressage exercise every day or so won’t hurt any horse, but I question very much elite competitions. Note , I have had a license to train steeplechase horses, it ended with that I killeth the best friend I ever have had , my horse Anarchist….
Thats odd Ann, you wouldnt put an Xmas hat on a dog but you did engage in steeplechase racing, reknown for its dangers, accidents and fatalities.
At home we have these discussions all the time, I invariably lose…
Rog, I’m an ” animal rights ” person now. I have actually written a letter to the editor for an English paper, protesting against Grand National, as a person who trained a horse that finished third in the Swedish version.
BTW, I have read a book by Jaques -Yves Costeau , when he described how they caught dolphins in the Mediterranean to study them in a pool. He killed many ( hundreds) of dolphins in his attempts. Most dolphins committed suicide in captivity.
In today’s http://www.crikey.com.au there is an article by Dr Tim Stephens, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney on the issue including comment that:
“…it is very welcome news that Prime Minister Rudd and Environment Minister Garrett have dusted off the report of the Sydney Panel of Independent International Legal Experts, which had been hidden in a bottom draw by the former government.
The Sydney Panel Report outlines a suite of legal options for successfully challenging Japan’s whaling program. These include taking a case to the International Court of Justice in The Hague for breaching the Whaling Convention, which allows genuine scientific research but prohibits plainly commercial whaling. Both Australia and Japan have accepted the jurisdiction of the World Court, so there is no impediment to bringing a case immediately.
Japan could also be hauled before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg for breaches of the Law of the Sea Convention. One of the advantages of this option is that the Tribunal can issue immediate provisional measures requiring Japan to cease is unlawful whaling activities. Other equally strong options include initiating compliance procedures under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species which could lead to a collective trade embargo.”
Hmm, its the International Law bogeyman again, then the IFAW talk about “Australia’s humpbacks”
The Australian war ship “Oceanic Viking” appears to be owned by a Norwegian company…, http://pub.tv2.no/nettavisen/verden/article1501525.ece
R
The Sydney Panel of what?
I just did a quick read of the various conventions and treaties,nothing really specific or contestable, this reads like a fishing trip for academics (pardon the pun).
Its not a warship it is being used by customs.
According to Rune’s link the ship is a ” kabellegger”. Have no clue what that is, maybe a vessel that is involved in laying cabels on the sea floor????
Anyway , according to Aussie media it is now armed with machine guns.
Excerpt from Seattle Times:
“”Australia is free to do whatever it wants, send planes or a ship,” said Ryotaro Suzuki, director of the fisheries division at Japan’s Foreign Ministry. “We have no immediate plans to lodge a protest against the Australian action, as long as they don’t use force to stop the Japanese whaling fleet”
Huh!!?? What EXACTLY did I say that was beneath the intellectual std for this site or offensive? It wasn’t racist or swearing. Please explain! I simply pointed out that we weren’t sending warships in, as the original title of this article says. I said we’d be observing.
I also proposed a question for discussion that I can’t possibly imagine could offend anyone.
And no, I haven’t changed my IP and I haven’t been hassling or whatever silliness is being implied.
Jennifer your post is simply inflammatory, rude and plain disrespectful. Please do say what justified such a deletion? It was this kind of rediculous paranoia that encouraged me to hassle you before. You know I can change my identity & IP as I pls, but beyond proving that to you, I don’t. You owe me an apology and I suggest strongly that you issue it.
“Hi, five comments have just been deleted from this thread. Pinxi was banned sometime ago from this site, but keeps changing his/her IP – so I have no alternative but to simply delete comment. No doubt my comment of 12.04pm prompted the response from him/her. As I commented at 12.04pm we would like the standard of discussion to have improved by the new year.”
You should delete and ban rog for this comment: “Its not a warship it is being used by customs.”
It’s essentially the same as the pt I’d made earlier, only far less intelligent of course.
A bit off topic but check out this VERY GOOD youtube video from a Norwegian site on orcas in the Antarctica and how scientists how discovered orca’s hunting techniques , in this case how orcas create waves to put off seals from the ice floes.
http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2007/desember/1197969063.66
Hey what do you know, the Americans reckon the humpbacks aren’t going to be hunted.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKT17714420071219
I will be surprised if that turns out to be true.
I would not. To not take the humpbacks will mobilise the opponents, it will be taken as proof that it is possible to influence Japan, thus the opposition will become even more intense. You make a step forward, then you consolidate, never look back, that’s our thinking.
Well Rune has made a ” typical Norwegian whaling analysis” , meaning that the whaling nations should never cave in to opposition.
You can also look at the issue in another way.
If the Japanese wouldn’t hunt the humpbacks, they deprive the anti whaling NGOs and governments their main criticism/ tool. The minkes, the Fin whales, sei whales, Bryde’s whales are not as charismatic as the humpbacks???
I have actually read on the Greenpeace’s site that anti whaling persons wish that Migaloo should be killed and that should be documented by GP as this would fire up the antis even more….
>I have actually read on the Greenpeace’s site that anti whaling persons wish that Migaloo should be killed and that should be documented by GP as this would fire up the antis even more….
Off course the comment was not made by Greenpeace, but by a general member of the public. Such comments have been made elsewhere too. In a true scientific study of the species, you would assume the Jpanese would want to take Migaloo. Maybe then their science would be taken more seriously.
>I will be surprised if that turns out to be true.
Seems you may be. The Aus Government is saying this is not enough, which is wise of them.
Ann: “If the Japanese wouldn’t hunt the humpbacks, they deprive the anti whaling NGOs and governments their main criticism/ tool.”
Certainly the humpback was a much appreciated gift to the antis. They must have been cheering. It was anticipated that AU and NZ would go nutter, no surprise.
I notice that the reactions to a possible humpback cessation is that it is not enough, Japan must stop everything.
When Japan chose to go ahead with the humpback, it will not serve their interests to cave in when the outcome would not only mean Japan does not achieve anything at all, but only makes matters worse.
Anyway it’s their call, they opted for this path.
As Travis says, “The Aus Government is saying this is not enough, which is wise of them” – absolutely right as well.
Meanwhile Australian officials are also saying “the relationship is strong enough that we can agree to disagree” (while at the same time saying to Japan “hey we are going to spy on you” :)).
It’s for those reasons that Norway’s thinking as described by R is normal. Caving in on something you said you would do only serves to shoot yourself in the foot (your opponents are only going to ask for more), and it’s not such a big issue that serious damage would be done anyway (although in Japan, foreign policy is regularly criticised as being too weak…).
So the signals are confusing, on the one had some Japanese officials are saying “hey mate, just calm down alright” (this is exactly what they should keep saying, I also think they should have issued some kind of public offer to some Australian officials to visit the ICR or something, get it in the Aussie press that Japan has nothing to hide and counter some spin).
But then on the other hand behind closed doors they even talking with the Americans about dropping the humpback from the target list this year? Well, that’s a bit strange, but we’ve only got the US ambassador’s word so far, and he didn’t mention what the US is saying to Japan in order to obtain such a concession. One recalls that the issue of humpbacks was laid on the negotiation table at the IWC meeting this year, but no one else came to the party then. Mind you, it wouldn’t be out of character for Japan to agree to drop the humpbacks for almost nothing in return (hark back to the 1980’s when the moratorium was imposed). Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me is the saying.
Let’s see anyway – maybe I’m wrong and the excited Aussies will calm down a bit now, as Ann suggests this might be useful. Until we hear more it’s hard to say, but I’m suspecting Japan may indeed be creating yet another whaling policy headache for itself here.
R,
Exactly what you said. If they do drop the humpbacks (still, it will be very interesting to find out the reasons why), the next thing that will happen is the antis will say “so don’t you need to revise your JARPA II objectives now, as they were dependent on humpback samples?”
The poor folks at the ICR will be irrate, as they were said to be when Nakasone shot them in the foot back in the 1980’s.
> I notice that the reactions to a possible humpback
> cessation is that it is not enough, Japan must stop everything.
I would hope the decisions makers are watching these developments and having another think about it 🙂 They can’t be so naive to not have predicted that themselves though. Still, who knows what the US has been whispering in their ears.
> only makes matters worse.
Being involved in whaling, you must be incredibly frustrated that such an important ally is so erratic and indecisive. Even the people in Japan making these decisions must be frustrated, surely knowing that they are only creating more work for themselves as this snowballs.
Maybe Norway and Iceland need to organize another “hey Japan! are you a whaler or aren’t you?” media blizt 🙂 Unfortunately you guys are only the size of New Zealand as well, the US seems to be the only nation with any influence.
Now, we find that whales may have decended from deer-like animals. Does that mean the Japanese will be coming to the U.S. to kill our deer?
Whales May Have Come From Deer-Like Animal
Some Scientists Speculate That Whales, Dolphins Descended From Small Deer-Like Critter
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=4027289
Here’s some additional context:
“Japan would announce it will defer this year’s humpback kill until next year’s meeting of the International Whaling Commission.
And the deferral may become a permanent one, rolling over each year until the current scientific program known as JARPA II comes to an end.
But details of the planned backdown weren’t supposed to be revealed until after the formal diplomatic protest. And there are concerns that premature revelation could cause Japan to reconsider. ”
No word about what the US said in order to get such a concession though.
…
“Early revelation of the planned backdown over humpbacks could increase pressure on Japan’s diplomats to maintain a hard line.”
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s2123528.htm
Well, people who think whaling is good will hope for the “hard-line” approach, but I guess if the foreign ministry think Japan’s greater interest is at risk it will shoot itself it’s whaling policy in the foot again 🙂
Hey by the way, does anyone know the situation with Japan, Humpbacks and CITES? I was under the impression that they had a reservation required to import the meat back into Japan, but I’ve seen recently anti-whaling groups intimating that they do not, with respect to humpbacks.
If this is really the truth that the Japanese won’t hunt the humpbacks , methinks I will write a letter to the Japanese Embassy and thank them for the ” goodwill” gesture even if another 1000 whales will be killed.
This situation reminds me a little about the Icelandic resumption of whaling in 2003.
They had an intention to kill a big number of minkes and Fins but backed down to a quota of 25 minkes leaving out the Fin whales.
Some people wanted to thank Iceland for this move ” as it was as close to a victory one could get” ( Greenpeace) but others said that Iceland should not be rewarded with any thanks as long as they still were whaling.
It would be a great thing if the Japanese backed down on the humpback kill – but not if you are a fin or minke. I guess that personal experience of patting a koala, not an echidna, makes one feel more for the Kangaroo Island koalas than the echidnas, and not many have the experience of the second largest animal on earth mugging a whale watching boat in Australia. As we know too well from discussions here, having an ‘endangered’ tag attached to you does not bring you popularity or peace.
Latest I heard is that there will be a meeting tomorrow with the Japanese and some 13 foreign countries who will be expressing their concern about JARPA II. There is the opportunity for many holes in feet on both sides depending on which way the discussions go.
The decision of the Federal Labor Gov’t. to send a ship to shadow the Jap whaler is a shameful day for Australia. There it will be, in alliance, with the extremist and often violent Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace people who apparently have no qualms about practicing violence against person or property.
It also reminds one of the shameful action of a former Australian Government, when Gareth, “Biggles” Evans sent the RAAF to ‘buzz’ and harass Australian citizens going about their lawful business at the Gordon River, Tas. There again in support of a gaggle of fundamentalist green groups.
Once again, shame on you, Australia
Some readers here will probably take issue with these comments coming out of Australia:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22957352-25377,00.html
“Yet undoubtedly the Japanese will see this move as crude, populist politics. And such populist gestures always raise questions of consistency.
No Australian government has taken action on anything like this scale over any aspect of human rights abuses by any country.
So it seems we take the rights of whales more seriously than we take the rights of human beings.”
Australians seem quite capable of expressing different ideas and opinions about a particular topic. It is good we don’t have press “censorship” and have reasonable levels of information available to us.
The rights of animals over humans line is once again trotted out, without the recognition that people can care about both.
Well done on your stance here Australia.
“The rights of animals over humans line is once again trotted out, without the recognition that people can care about both.”
The point I think that Greg Sheridan, Foreign editor, was making was that, through Australia’s actions it appears that Australia is more concerned with the whales killed by the Japanese in accordance with international agreements to which Australia itself has adhered, than the people who suffer from human rights abuses at the hands of governments like China.
He wasn’t suggest that Australians don’t care about both, just that it appears from Australias actions that whales are regarded as a more serious issue.
Or else what is the flaw in Sheridan’s logic? Is it wrong to assume that the gravity of a matter will be reflected in the actions taken in response to it?
They are separate issues. You could pull out endless examples to argue about. The issue at hand here is the Japanese whaling, not organ harvesting in China, lashings for raped women in Saudi Arabia or the homeless at Christmas on Sydney’s streets. Few would argue the gravity of numerous national and global issues. You do what you can and keep trying.
OK, I will have to take your word for it that this isn’t the crude, populist politics at the expense of the Japanese, that it just happens to appear to be. Thanks
The Australian states: ” Japan harpoons the US deal”
It’s very unclear if the Japanese will abandon to hunt the humpbacks.
It seems like the Japanese government says that the plans to hunt the humpbacks will comtinue, however on Japanese environmental journalist stated :
“Mr Schieffer’s claims of an agreement were supported by Japanese environmental journalist Junko Sakuma, who told The Australian that Japan was unlikely to kill the full quota of 50humpbacks.
Sakuma said she believed there had been debate within the Japanese Government over the humpback quota and that Japan might kill only a handful.
“They can use the US intervention as an excuse for changing their initial plan to hunt humpbacks, though they are very reluctant to listen to advice or suggestions by NGO peoples or even the Australian government officials,” she said.
Sakuma cited the reduced size of the fleet’s crew – 250, down 25 – as further evidence Japan was not planning to hunt 50 humpbacks”
If anyone has more information , please post it here ASAP, thanks!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22957346-2702,00.html
” that Japan might kill only a handful”
This methinks would be a quite futile gesture, not satisfying anyone.
Latest news:
“Japan has announced it will defer plans to kill up to 50 humpback whales in the Southern Ocean this summer.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/21/2125804.htm
OK, they will receive a thanks mail for this from me!