Whaling Pros And Cons

953 Words2 Pages

Whaling is seen in the international community as a cruel act to animals. The reasons behind whaling varies; from its meat consumption to its use for medicine. Unfortunately, the international ban on commercial whaling, it has not abated the act by some countries such as Japan and Norway. In addition to
Iceland, Japan and Norway killed 2,000 whales each year (WDC, No Date). As the whaling continues, its effect becomes obvious in the population of the whales. It was generally believed that further whaling would put the population of whales under threat, a commercial ban was enacted by the International Whaling
Commission (IWC) in 1986 (WDC, No Date). Despite this ban, it still baffles the IWC to realize that over
50,000 whales have been killed …show more content…

Norwegian’s prowess at whaling beats the combined efforts of
Iceland and Japan at whaling and exports well over 400,000 pounds of products derived from whale meat.
Do I think the whaling ban constitutes a violation of these nations' sovereignty?
Without a careful consideration of the pros and cons, one might easily jump into the conclusion that the ban violates the sovereignty of nations. However, it is hard to monitor countries whether the whaling was done truly to uphold their cultural practices or for commercial purposes. For example, the argument by the
Japanese that their fishermen have been whaling for centuries and that is part of the culture which no ban will stop (Rupert Wingfield-Hayes, 2016), is nothing but a way to justify their continued commercial whaling. On the one side, it is easy to say that there are many whales in the ocean and that not all the whole world hunt them therefor whaling by Japan and a few other countries will not out the population of whales under threat. On the other hand, it can be argued as well that there are many types of fish species in the ocean and therefore Japan has alternative to fishing rather than …show more content…

The need for neutrality is to prevent the promotion of self-interest either for whaling or anti-whaling.
2
How do you define a "cultural activity"?
For me, cultural activity is that which a group of people or country does and it is passed from one generation to another. For example, honor killing in a common cultural practice in some Asian countries.
This act has been tagged barbaric by many other countries. Just like there are two sides to a coin, outsiders of a cultural practice should endeavor to have a holistic view of such practice before passing judgements.
Does the economic impact of whaling on the small fishing villages weigh into your decision?
The economic impact of whaling in the small fishing village does not play a great role in my decision. The countries alleged to be involved in whaling such as Japan and Norway are economically advanced countries and should be able to provide for the small fishing village, particularly in the case of Japan. I believe Japan can still maintain this fishing village without recourse to whaling.
How should these claims be balanced against world opinion - which is generally very supportive of the protection of

Open Document