Japan has long been a leader in commercial whaling. In the 1930s, Japan took to the Southern Ocean, killing whales for their meat and oil. The Germans bought whale oil from the Japanese to in the years leading up to World War II. Since then, Japanese whaling has increased exponentially, becoming more commercialized and more damaging to the environment. Whale populations are dwindling in the Antarctic, being mined rather that sustainably fished. Many of the 13 "great whale" species are endangered or seriously threatened because of whaling practices, most notably those of Japan.

In May 2010, Australia and New Zealand brought a case against Japan in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) based in the Hague, claiming that Japan's whaling operations in the Antarctic violated their legal obligations under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW). Under this convention, Japan is prohibited from engaging in commercial whaling operations, using factory ships for the processing of whales and whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary. Japan signed off on this convention, agreeing to abide by its rules and provisions. However, Norway and Iceland who also whale in the Southern Ocean, refused to sign the convention. While Japan claimed that the whaling and processing of whales was for scientific research, which is allowed by the convention, Australia provided evidence to the contrary claiming it to be "commercial whaling in disguise."

In 1982, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) established a zero-catch limit for all whaling with two notable exceptions: aboriginal whaling for those native tribes whose subsistence is based on whaling, and scientific research. Both examples are limited and must be reviewed by committees before any whaling actually occurs. In 1994, the IWC banned all whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary and prohibited the use of factory ships, which could be used to kill whales and process the meat while on board. Japan's Whale Research Program (JARP II) was granted a special permit in the Antarctic to capture and take samples of limited numbers of whales for scientific research, with permission to kill only a select few species and only when absolutely necessary to obtain samples for study. Although it has been clear to the international public that Japan's whaling operations were malicious and dangerous to the environment, the ICJ finally conceded that there was a preponderance of evidence that Japan abused their whaling privileges and violated three of the convention's provisions.

 

After years of deliberation, on March 31, the ICJ ruled in favor of Australia and declared that Japan must immediately cease its whaling operations in the Southern Ocean. They based their decision largely on Japan's killing and processing of fin, humpback and minke whales, all prohibited by the scientific permit. On average, JARPII killed 450 minke whales annually in the Antarctic, which is about half the target sample size of minke whales in the area. In addition, the program has killed 50 fin and 50 humpback whales per season. Throughout its investigation, the ICJ found that since the JARP II was granted the permit in 2005, some 3,600 minke whales have been captured and killed while providing very little scientific output, yet boosting whale meat commercially.

 

While Japan still disagreed with the Court's decision, believing it to be an attempt by Australia to implement its own cultural norms in Japan, they initially agreed to abide by the decision, which is legally binding. However, just a few days after they announced their cooperation with the convention, Japan did an about-face and announced that they would continue their whaling operations in the Antarctic with a "redesigned program." They celebrated this new program with a whale buffet for hundreds of officials and lawmakers. Japan's lack of concern for the environment and the whaling population in Antarctica in the past, leaves little hope for any improvement in this new program in the future.
     
Japan claims whaling to be a part of their culture, but one must wonder where the line between culture and commerce is drawn. Tribes around the world, like the Makah in Washington state, whale on the premise of cultural survival, but are not so controversial. Tribes such as these are granted permission to whale under the provision that they need the meat to sustain themselves and their society. They also kill on average only two or three whales per year, use the entrails and blubber for clothing and the bones for constructing shelter-no part of the whale goes to waste in tribal societies. Japan, however, cannot make such claims. They kill hundreds of whales every year, whale meat is not the sole staple in the Japanese diet and the entrails and bones are thrown out with the trash. Japan is killing off whales faster than they can breed, causing a massive decrease in whale populations.

Much of present-day media attention focuses on Japan's whaling in the Antarctic. News articles, magazine features and the increasingly popular TV show, Whale Wars all discuss the criminality of Japan's commercial whaling system. However, it is important to remember that Norway and Iceland also have a very strong whaling presence in the Southern Ocean. Although they do not pose as much of a threat to whale populations and seem to take relatively more measures to whale sustainably, they still do perpetrate commercial whaling in this region. The Northern Ocean is also heavily whaled by all three nations, yet almost no media coverage is given to the region and this or any other ICJ case comes to its defense, leaving it open to exploitation. Policymakers are standing and taking notice of the whaling practices in Antarctica, but it is too early to say whether policies will curb commercialized whaling from Japan.