For 20 years the world`s whales have mostly been left alone by man. Norway, Iceland and Japan, together with some indigenous groups, have been allowed to hunt a few thousand each year on the basis of scientific research, but the global free-for-all that decimated populations in all oceans for more than 100 years ended in 1986 on a wave of revulsion at the way they were killed and concern that stocks would never recover.

That might be about to change. About 35 pro-whaling countries, some of which have no coastline or history of whaling, are expected to gain control of the 66-member International Whaling Commission, the body which governs the industry. In a triumph of intensive lobbying led by Japan, they are likely to dismantle the laws that protect whales and prepare the way for the eventual full resumption of commercial whaling.

To the horror of more than 150 large conservation organisations worldwide, the anti-whaling countries led by Britain, New Zealand, Australia and the US, say there is little that can now be done diplomatically to prevent the takeover by pro-whalers at the IWC meeting in St Kitts in mid-June.

"On paper they certainly now have a majority. I do not think the anti-whalers can hold the line," said Leah Garces, campaigns director of the World Society for the Protection of Animals, on behalf of anti-whaling groups worldwide. "We could now go back to the 1970s when whales were unprotected throughout the world. This is critical," she said.

"The best we now think is possible is a tie in St Kitts. It looks very serious. We think it will be bloody", said a British official close to the talks.

Campaign
The Guardian has learned that following a narrow defeat last year at the IWC`s meeting in Korea, Japan went to remarkable lengths to avoid defeat in St Kitts. Earlier this month it convened a secret meeting in Tokyo of pro-whaling countries, including Norway, to prepare tactics and to ensure that many small countries, which traditionally hesitate to go to IWC meetings because of the cost, travel this year to the Caribbean.

Japan is also known to have increased aid to countries such as Belize, Mali, Togo, Gambia and others which have joined the IWC recently but who have so far not voted. Earlier this year it pledged more than $1m (£538,000) to the Pacific island of Tuvalu, a pro-whaling IWC member, and has reached similar deals with Nauru and Kiribati and other desperately poor countries in the Pacific. In the last week it is believed to have offered a large aid package to other Pacific countries. It has also invited the heads of state of seven African countries and eight Caribbean and central American countries to visit Tokyo in the last year. All are expected to vote with Japan at St Kitts.

At least $300m was given last year to Antigua, Dominica, Grenada, Panama, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, and St Kitts and Nevis. Much of the aid has been ostensibly to develop their fishing industries, but Japan traditionally stresses that whales are responsible for low fish catches.

A Japanese government official, who asked not to be named, denied that Tokyo had negotiated aid packages at the meeting this month but admitted there had been discussions of "logistics", such as how to ensure that poorer pro-whaling countries showed up in St Kitts. British diplomats said last night that they feared they had lost the battle to secure more anti-whaling votes.

New Zealand`s conservation minister, Chris Carter, last month toured the Pacific, visiting the Solomons, Kiribati and Nauru requesting them to change their mind, but was rebuffed. "It looks increasingly likely that the pro-whaling nations will achieve a majority on the commission for the first time," said Mr Carter.

Changes
"At the moment we will take anyone," said a British diplomat close to the talks. "We have been singularly unsuccessful in the Caribbean. The Gambia might think twice if it was pointed out that their tourists might not like the fact that they are going to vote with whalers, but it`s not looking good."

Anti-whaling countries now expect Japan to select the body`s next chairman and vice-chairman and to make key procedural changes such as the introduction of secret ballots. An immediate return to commercial whaling, which would require 75% of the votes, is unlikely for five years, said a British government official.

"The first steps of the pro-whaling groups will be to disband the IWC`s conservation committee. It will then overturn the commission`s formal condemnation of Japan`s scientific whaling programme, which exploits the loophole in the moratorium to hunt for whales," said one observer. The Japanese foreign ministry official said he was unaware of any proposal by Tokyo to abolish the conservation committee.

Even though commercial whaling could be technically possible within a few years, there is now little demand for the meat. Japan`s meat from expeditions ends up in restaurants and supermarkets, and there are plans to start selling it cheaply to schools and hospitals. Norway traditionally has not been able to sell all the whale meat it gets from its hunt and sends some to Japan.

Junichi Sato, campaign director of Greenpeace Japan, conceded that a pro-whaling coup at the IWC would be "a disaster". He said the introduction of secret ballots would enable smaller countries, particularly Caribbean islands, to vote with Japan on every issue without fear of alienating the US, another major aid donor. "It would certainly lead to more votes for Japan," he said.

Explainer: International Whaling Commission
Until the mid-1980s the International Whaling Commission was a small club of the few largely pro-whaling countries that still had fleets. But in one of global conservation`s greatest successes, a moratorium on commercial whaling was passed in 1986, since when only "scientific whaling" has been allowed. But even as the IWC became effectively a conservation group, Japan began to try to hijack the organisation, encouraging small, poor countries, especially in the Pacific and Caribbean, to join and vote for what it calls "sustainable whaling" in return, it is widely alleged, for aid.

As the number of pro-whaling countries has grown, so too have the anti-whalers. Sixty-six countries are now IWC members and a split has emerged, with Japan, Iceland and Norway at the head of many very small countries and Britain, Australia, New Zealand and the US opposing them, in front of a lot of "wishy-washy" rich countries.

Because membership of the increasingly eccentric IWC is open to any country, and all votes count as equal, it has been compared to the Eurovision song contest, where countries vote with their friends and for their enemies` enemies. Many countries have not joined the IWC because of the high membership fees. Both sides openly court countries that have no historical or present interest in whaling: the pro-whalers have signed up landlocked Mongolia and Mali, while the antis have the Czech Republic and Luxembourg.

Predicting the IWC votes has always been hard because some member countries neglect to pay their dues, and so are prevented from voting, while others sometimes do not turn up to meetings.

If the pro-whalers gain control of the IWC this year they will probably agree to vote in secret in future, making it easier for small countries to vote against rich states such as the US and Britain. They may also vote to make it cheaper for developing countries to join, paving the way for the 75% vote which the pro-whalers need to overturn the moratorium.
(By John Vidal and Justin McCurry, The Guardian, 30/05/2006)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/fish/story/0,,1785651,00.html