

The Antarctic program was nearly bankrupt, but if the government had overhauled it on its own, it would have incurred the wrath of a strong anti-whaling lobby, and could have been criticised for caving in to foreign anti-whaling activists. Now officials can say the court forced their hand.


In a March 31 ruling, the International Court of Justice in The Hague ordered Japan to stop granting permits for its Antarctic whaling program, which allowed an annual cull of about 1000 whales. The world court, upholding arguments made by Australia, rejected Japan's contention that the program was scientific.


"We didn't go to court in order to lose," a government official close to the case said on condition of anonymity. "But it was obvious that the whaling program had to be changed."

In a way, the ruling was an example of "gaiatsu", the external pressure that Japan has traditionally relied on to bring about change when vested interests are strong. It was the arrival of US Commodore Matthew Perry and his warships that forced Japan to end a long period of isolation. More recently, gaiatsu has pushed market opening and deregulation of the economy.

Many officials, even some in the fisheries circle, were long aware of the problems of the research program. But few, if any, had incentive to fight the pro-whaling lobby: whalers, the whaling division of the Fisheries Agency, whaling-related businesses and powerful MPs. For them the ruling virtually takes care of what was long overdue, without anyone losing face.


The ruling technically leaves the door open for Japan to try to design a new hunt that would qualify as scientific, but any new program would face intense scrutiny. And it will only get more expensive: The program's ageing mother ship, the Nisshin Maru, will soon be retired and would need to be replaced.

