The international court ruling against Japanese whaling two weeks ago may have given the Japanese government a convenient political out.
The Antarctic program was nearly bankrupt, but if the government had overhauled it on its own, it would have incurred the wrath of a strong anti-whaling lobby, and could have been criticized for caving in to foreign anti-whaling activists. Now officials can say the court forced their hand.
“It seemed to me they were anxious to lose,” said Masayuki Komatsu, a former Japanese fisheries official known for his battles at the International Whaling Commission to defend Japanese hunts.
He accused Japanese officials of losing “passion and love” for whaling and not fighting hard enough in court.
In a March 31 ruling, the International Court of Justice in The Hague ordered Japan to stop granting permits for its Antarctic whaling program, which allowed an annual cull of about 1,000 whales. The court, upholding arguments made by Australia, rejected Japan’s contention that the program was scientific.
Though top Japanese officials called the ruling regrettable, they announced within hours that Japan would abide by it. A day later, the Japanese Fisheries Agency said the country would skip the next Antarctic hunt.
“We didn’t go to court in order to lose,” a government official close to the case said on condition of anonymity, because he is not authorized to speak publicly about the issue. “But it was obvious that the whaling program had to be changed.”
In a way, the ruling was an example of gaiatsu, the external pressure that Japan has traditionally relied on to bring about change when vested interests are strong. It was the arrival of US Commodore Matthew Perry and his warships that forced Japan to end a long period of isolation. More recently, gaiatsu has pushed market opening and deregulation of the Japanese economy.
Many officials, even some in the fisheries circle, were long aware of the problems with the research program. However, few, if any, had incentive to fight the pro-whaling lobby: whalers, the whaling division of the Fisheries Agency, whaling-related businesses and powerful lawmakers. For them the ruling virtually takes care of what was long overdue, without anyone losing face.
“Unfortunately Japan cannot change its policies without gaiatsu, and [the ruling] definitely serves that role to finally bring about a change,” said Atsushi Ishii, an international relations expert in science and technology at Tohoku University.
Officially, Japan still defends whaling as a cultural tradition, and says the research hunts were collecting data to prove commercial hunting could be resumed sustainably. Japan’s coastal whaling dates back to the 12th century, though its Antarctic expeditions began only in the 1930s. The research hunts started in 1987 following an international moratorium on commercial whaling. The whale meat is sold at home to finance the program, but sales have fallen as whale meat became less popular, forcing sharp increases in government subsidies to keep the program afloat.
An initial subsidy of about ¥500 million (US$5 million) a year, or about 10 percent of its costs, grew to about ¥900 million in 2007, and is projected to exceed ¥5 billion for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30. That includes costs related to Sea Shepherd, the activist group that tries to impede the hunt, such as the dispatch of a patrol ship with the fleet and repairing damage from high-seas collisions. The Sea Shepherd protests have also curtailed the catch and put Japan in a negative light internationally by focusing attention on the hunt.
The Japanese fleet returned home on April 5 at the end of the 2013-2014 season with what may be its last Antarctic harvest: 251 minke whales, just a quarter of its quota.
The ruling technically leaves the door open for Japan to try to design a new hunt that would qualify as scientific, but any new program would face intense scrutiny. It will only get more expensive: The program’s aging mother ship, the Nisshin Maru, will soon be retired and would need to be replaced.
Officials generally agree that the most likely scenario is for Japan to withdraw from the Antarctic. Japan’s whaling operations can continue off its own coast, as well as in the north Pacific, where it culls about 300 minke whales annually through a separate research program. However, that program could be questioned when Japan goes to the International Whaling Commission, the main body that regulates whaling, for annual renewal.
Some lawmakers say Japan should quit the commission and return to commercial whaling. However, most officials and experts say such a drastic step would undermine Japan’s efforts to promote the international rule of law, notably when it comes to territorial disputes with China and South Korea.
Perhaps as importantly, questions remain about whether commercial whaling would be economically sustainable, given the declining appetite for whale meat in Japan.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with