1	whaling, sea shepherd, Ady Gil, Australia, News, Asia, Japan

The Japanese whale hunt in the Southern Ocean is always controversial in Australia. But, as predicted earlier this week, the political and public heat around the issue has escalated further following a Japanese whaling vessel ramming and effectively destroying the Ady Gil - a small trimaran - from the Sea Shepherd fleet.

Most Australians are anti-whaling – a stance supported by all political parties, including the government and the main Opposition party – and the widely available video evidence of the collision has only enhanced that view.  The pressure on the Australian government to ‘do something’ is stronger than ever.  The same situation can also be said to apply in New Zealand, where the Ady Gil was registered and where many of its crew are from.  With the Ady Gil now confirmed as having to be abandoned at sea, submerged and sunken, the public squabbling by supporters of either side about degrees of responsibility about the collision will do little other then keep the issue boiling along.  

The Australian government has been forced by the public pressure to publicly state a deadline of June before they decide on whether to take legal action against the whaling, depending on whether or not “substantial progress” has been made in diplomatic efforts to get Japan to end whaling.  As the opening words in this piece from the News Limited paper in Brisbane shows, it is being reported as the Australian government giving the Japanese government “until June to agree to abandon future whale hunts or Australia will take action in the international court.”

This is not actually what Australia’s Environment Minister said – he said if they “don't see substantial progress having taken place (by June)... then the question of legal action will be firmly in front of us, and the Government will be in a position to make a decision."  While this form of words is designed to provide some wiggle room, the only message the public will hear is that the Government will take court at the end of June if the Japanese government doesn't agree to stop whaling - which they won't.  It was always virtually certain that the Japanese would continue to ignore calls to stop or even to reduce whaling, but it is more certain than ever now.  But the wording of the Australian government's statement makes it far from certain that they will decide to take legal when this fact has been demonstrated in June at the next meeting of the International Whaling Convention.

However, if there is no move to initiate legal action, the heat will be turned up even more on the Australian government and public support for those who are prepared to action – that is, the folks from the Sea Shepherd – will probably grow even more.

Meanwhile, the conservative Opposition party – who normally are more likely to be complaining about the government being too captive to environmentalists – are slamming the government’s response as “gutless” and demanding the government “submit court action papers and give Japan until 30 June to end whaling.”  This media statement by the Opposition last June shows they were already demanding court action back then. It also contains a useful list of some of the previous commitments by the current government to do so, and comments by the current Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, when he was in Opposition back in 2005, calling on the then conservative government to initiate court action.

Calls from government Ministers in both Australia and New Zealand for both the whalers and the conservationists to  ‘show restraint’ will continue to be ignored by both sides. It is far too late for that.  As the Sea Shepherd leader, Paul Watson, says whenever there are calls for restraint from the Australian government:

“We're not going to restrain ourselves from protecting these whales and we're not going to restrain ourselves from upholding international conservation law.  The Government has shown so much restraint over the years they have done absolutely nothing."

That last sentence is by far the most powerful part of the anti-whalers message. The disputes over this issue have been going for more than a decade, but there is little doubt it will become more volatile than ever over the rest of this year, which is of course also an election year in Australia.

ELSEWHERE: These two pieces provide some more useful bacground:

- This one from the website of The Australian newspaper provides some background to the perspective of the new Japanese government;

- This one from the website of The Guardian newspaper provides some background to the history and attitude of Paul Watson, the founder of Sea Shepherd.

ADDENDUM:  The collision that caused the sinking of the Ady Gil has provided plenty of opportunity for those whose aim is to inflame rather than inform, to indulge their bent for petty propaganda. It is understandable that the whalers and the environmentalists will engage in exaggerations and distortions, because they know the publicity battle is half the war.  But plenty of people like to indulge in the same sort of things to push their own ideological barrows. 

I find such approaches very boring and unfortunately sometimes destructive.  My interest is in encouraging discussion and increasing awareness of some of the background underlying various issues, so if you are someone who is only interested in indulging your pre-determined prejudices and reinforcing ignorance with juvenile name-calling, there are other blogs far more suited to that than this one . Fortunately or otherwise, there is even a site such as this here on Asian Correspondent, so I’ll link to it just this once.  Its author was happy to directly attack me simply for reporting the fact that the Sea Shepherd boat was rammed and making the not unreasonable assertion that “it could well lead to serious harm to diplomatic and other relations between Australia and Japan”, and my attempt to respond to put my side of the story was deleted or blocked, which says plenty really. 

In any case, on this blog, I’m interested in constructive engagement with people of all views, so readers are free to leave a comment if they wish.  If you want to read some more blogs which further discussion and insights into some of the public attitudes in Australia, these two - Ambit Gambit and Larvatus Prodeo - both have interesting posts and comment threads frmo differing perspectives.