'Jury out' on controversial whaling deal – Australia and Japan have failed to reach a breakthrough in an intensifying row on whaling, but delegates in three days of intense talks say that all sides agreed to keep seeking common ground.
Some 25 nations met at a Florida beach resort to consider a compromise to let Japan, Norway and Iceland hunt the ocean giants openly despite a 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling.
In return, whaling nations would agree to reduce their catch "significantly" over a 10-year period and put their activities under the close supervision of the 88-nation International Whaling Commission (IWC).
Asked if supporters and opponents of whaling could eventually strike a deal, Monica Medina, the US commissioner to the IWC, said: "I think the jury is out."
Australia and Japan "are emphasizing that their governments work together on many issues, but neither side has signaled that they are ready to completely meet the other one all the way," Medina told AFP.
Whaling commission leaders will use the Florida talks to flesh out the proposal and submit it to negotiators by April 22, giving nations time to review it before the next full IWC meeting the following month in Morocco.
Anthony Liverpool, the vice chair of the IWC, said he was hopeful after the talks near Saint Petersburg, Florida.
"All of the governments indicated a desire to move forward and I believe that is commendable and extremely important to the future of the IWC," he said in a statement.
Phil Kline of Greenpeace, which strongly opposes the compromise, said of the talks: "There are clear divisions, but they are willing to talk about it some more."
Japan, which says that whaling is part of its culture, kills hundreds of the marine mammals each year in the Antarctic Ocean, revolting Australia and New Zealand where whale-watching is a popular pastime.
Japan uses a loophole in the 1986 moratorium that allows "lethal research" on whales, with the meat winding up on dinner plates. Norway and Iceland defy the moratorium altogether by lodging objections with the IWC.
Medina said that the United States has not yet taken a position on the proposal as it is waiting for exact figures on the number of whales that would be hunted.
But she indicated that the United States -- one of the closest allies of both Australia and Japan -- was supportive of a compromise if it reduced the number of whales killed.
"The whales don't know the word moratorium," Medina said.
She said it was important to "look at the number of whales in the water that can be conserved under an agreement like this one."
"We don't have numbers and so I can't say that it would have achieved that yet," she said. "This isn't anything that the US could support at this point in time."
"It is a difficult decision and the US government would never take a position that would support commercial whaling or endorse it. But on the other hand, right now we have no way to stop it."
Several lawmakers from President Barack Obama's Democratic Party have already voiced opposition to the compromise.
Madeleine Bordallo, who heads the House subcommittee handling oceans policy, said she had "grave doubts" that negotiations would lead to fewer whales being killed.
"I cannot foresee any agreement that would be sufficiently airtight to merit overturning the 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling," Bordallo said.
Medina said that approval of the package in Morocco would need a vote by three-quarters of countries, casting doubt on the goal of reaching a consensus.
Australia had said before the talks that the IWC proposal was unacceptable as it did not stop Japanese whaling in the Antarctic. But participants said Australia faced pressure in the Florida talks to find a way to compromise.
"Conservation countries have moved far in offering a compromise but there has not been one single concession from the whalers," said Nicolas Entrup of the Munich-based Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society.
"What this amounts to is legitimizing commercial whaling," he said. "It is a moratorium on the moratorium." (AFP)
Some 25 nations met at a Florida beach resort to consider a compromise to let Japan, Norway and Iceland hunt the ocean giants openly despite a 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling.
AFP/File – File photo shows Japanese fishermen slaughtering a 10m-long bottlenose whale at the Wada port in Minami-Boso. …
In return, whaling nations would agree to reduce their catch "significantly" over a 10-year period and put their activities under the close supervision of the 88-nation International Whaling Commission (IWC).
Asked if supporters and opponents of whaling could eventually strike a deal, Monica Medina, the US commissioner to the IWC, said: "I think the jury is out."
Australia and Japan "are emphasizing that their governments work together on many issues, but neither side has signaled that they are ready to completely meet the other one all the way," Medina told AFP.
Whaling commission leaders will use the Florida talks to flesh out the proposal and submit it to negotiators by April 22, giving nations time to review it before the next full IWC meeting the following month in Morocco.
Anthony Liverpool, the vice chair of the IWC, said he was hopeful after the talks near Saint Petersburg, Florida.
"All of the governments indicated a desire to move forward and I believe that is commendable and extremely important to the future of the IWC," he said in a statement.
Phil Kline of Greenpeace, which strongly opposes the compromise, said of the talks: "There are clear divisions, but they are willing to talk about it some more."
Japan, which says that whaling is part of its culture, kills hundreds of the marine mammals each year in the Antarctic Ocean, revolting Australia and New Zealand where whale-watching is a popular pastime.
Japan uses a loophole in the 1986 moratorium that allows "lethal research" on whales, with the meat winding up on dinner plates. Norway and Iceland defy the moratorium altogether by lodging objections with the IWC.
Medina said that the United States has not yet taken a position on the proposal as it is waiting for exact figures on the number of whales that would be hunted.
But she indicated that the United States -- one of the closest allies of both Australia and Japan -- was supportive of a compromise if it reduced the number of whales killed.
"The whales don't know the word moratorium," Medina said.
She said it was important to "look at the number of whales in the water that can be conserved under an agreement like this one."
"We don't have numbers and so I can't say that it would have achieved that yet," she said. "This isn't anything that the US could support at this point in time."
"It is a difficult decision and the US government would never take a position that would support commercial whaling or endorse it. But on the other hand, right now we have no way to stop it."
Several lawmakers from President Barack Obama's Democratic Party have already voiced opposition to the compromise.
Madeleine Bordallo, who heads the House subcommittee handling oceans policy, said she had "grave doubts" that negotiations would lead to fewer whales being killed.
"I cannot foresee any agreement that would be sufficiently airtight to merit overturning the 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling," Bordallo said.
Medina said that approval of the package in Morocco would need a vote by three-quarters of countries, casting doubt on the goal of reaching a consensus.
Australia had said before the talks that the IWC proposal was unacceptable as it did not stop Japanese whaling in the Antarctic. But participants said Australia faced pressure in the Florida talks to find a way to compromise.
"Conservation countries have moved far in offering a compromise but there has not been one single concession from the whalers," said Nicolas Entrup of the Munich-based Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society.
"What this amounts to is legitimizing commercial whaling," he said. "It is a moratorium on the moratorium." (AFP)
No comments:
Post a Comment