The Japanese Whaling simulation focuses
on the interaction and exchange of ideas between students. The Simulation
is a unique way of encouraging students to participate in concepts such
as trade and environment. In today's era of technological innovation, the
distinctiveness of "trade" from the concepts of distant cultures and environment
is capricious, it is rather the conjugality of international trade with
the various cultures and the environment that is accentuated. The schedule
of events in this simulation provides a venue for students to learn
new concepts and exchange their ideas concerning their particular countries
in the arena of international trade.
To learn more about SITE, you can contact the TED projects at jlee@american.edu.
Schedule of Events:
The simulation will be over the span of two sessions, with the first a
lecture an introduction an the second the actual simulation.
Lecture and Introduction:
Dr. Lee will welcome the students with the idea of a unique multi-disciplinary
approach to education: Simulation.
Dr. Lee will introduce the students to the concepts of Globalization with
the particular emphasis on the intersection of trade, environment and culture.
These terms will be defined and will serve as the basis for understanding
our unique period in history, referred to as conjunctions.
The Web Simulation
This simulation focuses on an international environmental concern for the
protection of eight endangered whales species that conflicts with Japan’s
culture in terms of its tradition, diet and economic interests in unilateral
commerce.
Students will be assigned to particular teams, they will be required to
research the position for their particular organization or government. Each
student must present a well-formulated argument to the panel of judges during
the simulation.
As eight largest of the whale species have been recorded as "endangered"
under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, in 1986, the International Whaling
Commission (IWC) voted for a moratorium on commercial whaling. In 1987,
a year before Japan agreed to give up commercial whaling, Japan developed
a proposal to begin "scientific research" on whales. According he Article
VIII of the International Whaling Commission, "any Contracting Government
may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national
to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research subject
to such restrictions as to number and subject to such other conditions as
the Contracting Government thinks fit."
According to Kunio Arai, head of the Japan Whaling Association, the main
purpose of Japan's research is to determine natural mortality and pregnancy
rates in the minke whale to prove that the whale populations are big enough
to resume hunting. Greenpeace, on the other hand, argues that Japan is exploiting
a loophole in IWC rules by using scientific research as disguise for whale
hunting.
The forum for the simulation will be an international meeting, in which
all groups will present their arguments to a panel of judges.
The students in the simulation will be divided into the following teams:
The eight largest of the whale species have been recorded as "endangered"
under the U.S. Endangered Species Act and the International Whaling Commission
(IWC) voted for a moratorium on commercial whaling, which began in 1986. However,
by labeling its whaling activities as "research", Japan has exploited a loophole
in IWC rules. Japan, the main opponent of the ban on whale hunting, has turned
the matter into an issue of national pride. The Japanese believe that the
whale stocks are hardier than Western scientists think and this underlies
some of the conflicts between Japan and the West about global environmental
affairs. For example, the Japanese have been slow to stop whaling on the high
seas because they view the whale as a form of food.
Under pressure from the United States, Japan agreed to give up whaling from
1988 in line with an IWC moratorium on commercial whaling (see
NWHALE case). The moratorium was adopted because the IWC considered that
the survival of some species is in doubt. A year before it was due to cease
whaling, Japan came up with a proposal to begin "scientific research" whaling.
Under Article VIII of the International Whaling Commission, member nations
can kill as many whales as they like for scientific research purposes. Research
proposals must be submitted to the IWC's scientific advisory committee but
the committee's advice can be ignored. While the Institution of Cetacean Research,
which took over Japan's whaling activities when commercial catching was banned,
argue that Japanese "research" fleet activities are in line with IWC "stipulations",
disruptive activities are "unjustifiable".
The Debate
Greenpeace, on the other hand, argues that Japan is exploiting a loophole
in IWC rules by using scientific research as disguise for whale hunting.
Kazuo Yamamura, a spokesman for the Institute of Cetacean Research, responsible
for Japan's scientific whaling under government contract, argues that Japan's
whaling is true scientific research. According to Kunio Arai, head of the
Japan Whaling Association, the main purpose of Japan's research is to determine
natural mortality and pregnancy rates in the minke whale. In 1989, Japan
killed 273 whales as part of research aimed at proving whale populations
are big enough to resume hunting. There has been debate going on in the
IWC 1993 meeting about the methods used to kill whales for scientific research.
The Japanese use electric lances to stun the whale after harpooning which
leaves it writhing for up to 8 minutes. The electric shock inflicted is
likely to increase the animal's pain and suffering. The IWC has called for
more information on the methods used to kill whales for its 1995 meeting
in the United Kingdom. However, the Japanese researchers have rejected non-lethal
methods of studying whales, such as taking skin samples, because this cannot
identify the age and sex.
The 1989 hunt, which the Institute of Cetacean Research described as feasibility
study, killed 330 minke whales and brought home 1,100 tons of whale meat
as "by-product". The sales of this "by-product" (red meat) equaled 1.6 billion
Yen (about $2 million then) and 6.5 million pounds wholesale by volume.
The meat will cost many times more than that in specialty restaurants (perhaps
$55 per pound). The claret-red, chewy whale meat is harvested from scientific
expeditions for up to 3,000 Yen or $25 for 1,000 grams. Some opponents say
that Japan is exploiting a loophole in the international agreement banning
whaling to keep its own whaling industry intact. Others argue that Japan's
research whaling is just a way to maintain readiness for the resumption
of full-scale commercial whaling operations. However, a London-based investigation
agency has disclosed that Japan is killing dolphins and using them as "hostages"
to keep the whaling industry alive. Apparently, the EIA also accused Japan
of killing dolphins and using them as bargaining counters in a cynical move
to support the whaling industry alive (see TUNA case) .
Since a worldwide whaling ban has been introduced in 1986, the Japanese
government has allowed the killing of at least 165,000 Dall's porpoises.
These dolphins are being processed in a whale factory owned by New Nippo,
one of Japan's largest whaling companies.
Although Japan stopped commercial whaling in 1986, it still hopes to resume
a regulated hunt if it can persuade the IWC that the minke whale is not
in danger. Japan failed to persuade more neutral nations to side with commercial
whalers in IWC, despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars in the
financial aid. Consequently, the International Whaling Commission voted
on May 14, 1993 to extend a 1985 global ban on commercial whaling in a stinging
rebuff to its host, Japan. After this meeting, facing growing pressure to
give up whaling completely, Japan bitterly attacked conservationist nations
and threatened to leave the IWC. In the meeting, France, supported by the
United States, Britain and New Zealand, proposed a whale sanctuary off the
Antarctic coast, which has since been adopted. Along with the whale sanctuary,
there was a proposed 50-year ban on killing whales between 40 degrees south
latitude and the Antarctic coast line.
Despite international efforts to conserve the whales, the Japanese commissioner
warned the United States and European countries to abandon what he called
their objectionable "ethnocentrism" and to respect other countries' diets,
habits, cultures and traditions. Finally, the whale's future rests upon
Japanese decision on whether or not to withdraw from the IWC -- to continue
whale hunting regardless of its extinction or, to cooperate with the international
consensus.
A 1994 decision by the IWC has established a whale sanctuary in the Antarctic
Ocean and increased the size of the Indian Ocean sanctuary. This was a bitter
loss for Japan, the only country opposing the measure. Japan's efforts to
cultivate votes in the IWC, backed by development assistant programs to
countries to influence member voting, was only partially successful. Several
Caribbean countries did abstain in the vote after receiving Japanese development
assistance.
Although there are eight whale species recorded as endangered in the U.S.
Endangered Species Act (the Fin whale, Minke whale, Blue whale, Gray whale,
Sperm whale, Bowhead whale, Bottlenose whale and Bryde whale), the Japanese
commercial whaling ban is directed towards the Minke species only.
The Hudson Case
The
Babyseal Case
The Bear
Case
The Shark
Case
The
Cheetah Case
The Deer
Case
The Salmon
Case
The
Reptile Case
The
Tortoise Case
See also:
The Institute of Cetacean Research
International
Whaling Commission
Greenpeace
Japan is the only country to vote against protection for a critically endangered
whale species at international meeting. See News .
"A Community on Edge". Far Eastern Economic Review (June 10, 1993): 34-35.
"A Global Consciousness." Oceans (March 1984): 64-69.
"Buying Sanctuary: A Permanent Way To Save the Whale."
The Economist 319 (June 1, 1991): 12-13.
"Cruel Whale Slaughter Methods Debated At Key Talks." Press Association
Newsfile (May 13, 1993).
"Dolphins' Day." The Economist November 30, 1991: 34-35.
"Earth Spiders and Careful Tigers" International Wildlife (March/April,1992):
40-47.
"Gray Whale Protection." Oceans (July 1977): 45-49.
"IWC Cracks Down On Activities of Scientific Whaling Nations." Nature 328
(July 2, 1987): 9.
"Japan Circumvents Whaling Ban." Nature 327 (June 18, 1987): 548.
"Japan Contemplates Bigger Kill." Nature 339 (June 22, 1989): 573.
"Japan Kills Dolphins as Whale Fight Hostages." Press Association Newsfile
(June 1, 1993).
"Japan Reveals Results of 'Scientific' Whaling." New Scientist (March 25,
1989): 17.
"Japan Whaling Group Says World Should Mind Its Own Business." Reuters (March
16, 1989).
Kalland, Arne and Moeran, Brian. Japanese Whaling: End of an Era?. London:
Curzon Press, 1992).
"Let Them Eat Beef." Time (May 24, 1993): 56-57.
"Minke On Menu." New Scientist (May 19, 1990): 27.
"More Insults Fly But Japan's 'Scientific' Whaling Goes On." Nature 337
(February 9, 1989): 494.
"New International Data To Show Whale Species In Danger." Reuters (June
11, 1989).
"Sharpening The Harpoons." Time (May 24, 1993): 56-57.
"Sperm Whale Oil and the Jojoba Shrub." Oceans (July 1977): 65-66.
"The Case For Scientific Whaling." Nature 344 (March 15, 1990): 189-190.
"To Kill A Whale." Oceans (January 1977): 62-65.
"Why the Japanese Are So Stubborn About Whaling." Oceans 32 (Spring 1989):
45-51.