Contents

1. Introduction
2. Japan's attempt to ´normalize´the IWC
3. The Pew Whale Symposia
4. The Gordian Knot
5. Normalizing VS. Modernizing
6. Conclusion

This document is also available in PDF format.

2. Japan’s Attempt to ‘Normalize’ the IWC

In February 2007, the Government of Japan hosted a Conference on Normalization of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in Tokyo. The Conference was not an official meeting of the IWC, nor sanctioned by it.  It was attended by representatives from 36 Governments and 20 observer organizations. With only a few exceptions the group of so-called like-minded countries - which favours the continuation of the current moratorium on commercial whaling and seeks to close the loophole which allows commercial whaling to continue under the guise of scientific research - did not attend.

The term ‘normalization’ was used for the first time by the delegation from Japan in March 2006 at a technical meeting of the IWC on the Revised Management Scheme (See Document IWC/58/RMS). It was meant to convey a return to the spirit of the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW).  It was later the theme of a paper presented by Japan to the IWC’s 58th Annual Meeting in St Kitts and Nevis in June 2006 and of a meeting hosted by Japan on the sidelines of the main IWC conference. The term also appeared in the ‘St. Kitts and Nevis Declaration’ - a document endorsed by a simple majority of the IWC member states present at the St. Kitts and Nevis meeting.

According to the Chair’s Summary of the Normalization conference, the Japanese Fisheries Agency (JFA) declared the IWC to be dysfunctional for eight reasons:

1. Its alleged disregard for international law (ICRW and treaty interpretation);
2. Its alleged disregard for the principle of science-based policy and rule-making;
3. Its alleged exclusion of whales from the principle of sustainable use of resources;
4. Its alleged disrespect of cultural diversity related to food and ethics;
5. Its alleged increasing emotionalism concerning whales;
6. Its alleged institutionalized combative/confrontational discourse that discourages co-operation;
7. Its alleged lack of good faith negotiations; and
8. Its alleged pressure on scientists which results in a lack of consensus scientific advice from the Scientific Committee.

Few would dispute that the IWC is passing through a difficult period in its history. However the reasons as described by the JFA above were clearly one-sided and over-simplified.