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.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under