Whaling 'peace deal' falls apart
source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10389638.stm
-
-
- jefftego
- added this
Attempts to agree a compromise between whaling nations and their opponents at the International Whaling Commission's (IWC) annual meeting have failed.
After two days of private discussions, delegates reported they had been unable to reach agreement on major issues.
The deal would have put whaling by Iceland, Japan and Norway under international oversight for 10 years.
Talks on the "peace process" have been going on for two years, and a further year's "cooling-off period" is likely.
The path forwards now is unclear. Many delegates are asking whether there is any point in leaving the issue open for a further year; if agreement is impossible, they suggest it would be better to face up to the fact now.
Opting for more time would "raise the question of the commission's credibility," said Remi Parmentier, senior policy adviser to the Pew Environment Group, which has been one of the organisations backing the exploration of compromise.
But there may also be a reluctance to leave the more constructive tone of the previous two years behind, and risk a return to the acrimony that formerly characterised the IWC.
However, other anti-whaling groups were pleased that their governments did not accept the draft agreement, as in their view it would have legitimised the whaling programmes of Iceland, Japan and Norway.
"Had this deal lived, it would have lived in infamy," said Patrick Ramage, head of the International Fund for Animal Welfare's (IFAW) whales programme.
"There may be a cooling-off period in the IWC, but meanwhile the whalers will be in hot pursuit of their prey."
After two days of private discussions, delegates reported they had been unable to reach agreement on major issues.
The deal would have put whaling by Iceland, Japan and Norway under international oversight for 10 years.
Talks on the "peace process" have been going on for two years, and a further year's "cooling-off period" is likely.
The path forwards now is unclear. Many delegates are asking whether there is any point in leaving the issue open for a further year; if agreement is impossible, they suggest it would be better to face up to the fact now.
Opting for more time would "raise the question of the commission's credibility," said Remi Parmentier, senior policy adviser to the Pew Environment Group, which has been one of the organisations backing the exploration of compromise.
But there may also be a reluctance to leave the more constructive tone of the previous two years behind, and risk a return to the acrimony that formerly characterised the IWC.
However, other anti-whaling groups were pleased that their governments did not accept the draft agreement, as in their view it would have legitimised the whaling programmes of Iceland, Japan and Norway.
"Had this deal lived, it would have lived in infamy," said Patrick Ramage, head of the International Fund for Animal Welfare's (IFAW) whales programme.
"There may be a cooling-off period in the IWC, but meanwhile the whalers will be in hot pursuit of their prey."
