Abe's Whaling Mistake: How Tokyo's Reinstatement of a Whaling Program Weakens Japan

As part of last week's World Oceans Day Conference, President Obama announced an executive action to expand protection of an area of the central Pacific Ocean from fishing, energy exploration, and other activities detrimental to ocean conservation and preservation. In addition, President Obama stated his intention to create government programs to address and combat illegal fishing and the global black-market seafood trade.The president’s plan comes only a week after Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stated to a parliamentary committee his desire for Japan to resume commercial whaling “in order to obtain scientific information indispensable to the management of the whale resources.” The prime minister made his request despite the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling in March 2014 that Japan’s whaling program did not fulfill its scientific research objectives. As part of an international treaty to ban commercial whaling, the ICJ ordered Japan to stop granting permits for the research whaling program. Disappointed and angered by the decision, Japan defended its research whaling programs by citing the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, which allows the utilization of whale stocks for scientific research. Nevertheless, the ICJ overruled Japan’s justifications, stating that the amount and quality of research derived from the program did not justify the approximately 1,000 whales killed per year.Japan plans to resume its recently banned research whaling program in early 2015. Since its inception in 1988, the program has killed over 10,000 minke and other whales, for the questionable goal of research. The program intends to hunt, capture, and kill whales for biological research and “to monitor recovering whale populations.” Monitoring recovering whale populations by killing whales is a hypocritical method to help whale populations. This suggests that Japan intends to hide commercial whaling under the guise of a research program.Japan initially hoped to resume the research whaling program in 2014, but delayed the program when the decision received criticism from the ICJ. Now, Japanese Minister of Agriculture Yoshimasa Hayashi says Japan will submit a new research whaling plan to the International Whaling Commission in order to prove that the program is intended for research, rather than for commercial whaling.Reinstatement of the program violates Japan’s obligations set out by the March 2014 ICJ ruling. While the official rationale for the program may be research, Japan still likely intends to sell the whale meat gained from the program to supermarkets, restaurants, and schools. If Japan takes this step toward reinstating its whaling programs, whether for research or commercial purposes, it could inspire other countries with prior whaling programs, such as Norway, to follow suit. A domino effect regarding a return to whaling programs would undermine the authority and credibility of the ICJ and weaken the power of other multinational judicial institutions and treaties.Further, Japan has expressed interest in resuming commercial whaling programs. The international community’s acceptance or indifference toward Japan’s reinstatement of ineffective research whaling programs will further motivate Japan to resume its commercial whaling missions.Proponents of commercial whaling in Japan, such as the Group to Preserve Whale Dietary Culture, claim that whaling is an important part of Japanese culture, and whale meat a keystone of the Japanese diet. These claims refute the recent decrease in demand of whale meat in Japan even before the ICJ ruling in March 2014; consumption of whale meat in Japan has fallen to 2 percent of its 1962 peak of 226,000 tons.Japan needs to specifically explain how and why such a whaling program can be used for scientific research, including the intended goals and practices of the program. Until such clarifications are made, Japan should cease discussion of resuming the program in light of the ICJ’s disapproval. The United States should counter Japan’s proposed whaling violation by imposing diplomatic sanctions and limiting cooperation on various bilateral projects. Moreover, the United States should help Japan realize that violating an international treaty would not be in Japan’s interest, as it would undermine the legitimacy of Japan as a credible and reliable international actor. Such a diminution would negatively impact Japan's move toward expanding its international diplomatic and military presence, while presenting problems for any defense of the Senkaku Islands rooted in international law. International treaties only exist and succeed if they are recognized and followed. By defying the norm of obeying well-supported international treaties, Japan would alienate itself from other prominent international actors.This is a lonely situation, no matter how delicious whale meat might taste.