In response to sffrenchman I am heartened by Wookies understanding of the fisheries situation in the Eastern Caribbean. These small islands states receive considerable funding from Japan, under the guise of supporting indigenous fishing. Of course the real reason in the position on whaling. The Eastern Caribbean nations are then slated for their perceived support of a return to whaling. This is turn decreases tourism income, and increases the reliance on money from Japan... an ever decreasing circle which can only be stopped by education and understanding.
Tourism income, especially during this current economic crisis is desperately needed by these communities, and the best way to support the islands is to keep bring foreign currency. Whilst on island talk to the local people, you'll find the the vast majority would much rather support non-whaling.
This is an interesting discussion, I do respect others' opinion on this matter, and I am not averse to changing my position based on further discussions and arguments. I thought that I would provide a little more details on where I currently stand on this matter.
As with everything else in life, actions have consequences. Surely, before accepting Japan's government money in exchange for their vote at the IWC, these governments must have considered all sides, including the damage that this could potentially create to their standing in the international community and potential negative impact on tourism or other economic activities. After all, whaling is not a cryptic issue that is not receiving any media attention.
Individuals make decisions every day based on issues that they feel strongly about. This translates at the ballot box in democratic countries, or through the use of their economic power. This is evident from when people choose to not support a particular corporation, state, or nation because they do not agree with some of their policies or what they stand for. There are numerous examples of this in history; in some cases, such actions have worked and in some cases they have not.
There are a number of issues that I particularly care about, and whaling is one of them (among many others related to the health of the marine environment). Given the choice, I will rather take my business to countries that do not support whaling, and these countries need the tourism business just as much as the nations we are talking about. I recognize that not everyone necessarily agrees with all their government policies, but I do believe that education is not sufficient, and that economic pressure will in turn force the population to apply pressure on said governments to change their policies. Of course, if these governments were not elected democratically, this would be a very different story, but from my limited Wikipedia search, it appears that these caribbean nations are either parliamentary democracies, or at least have some kind of elected representation.
One interesting point mentioned by Wookie ("
My cousin is a fish buyer, and he can't get his foot in the door")
is that Japan has actually cornered the fishing industry in these countries, preventing other to do business. Therefore, it seems to me that the business brought in by Japan could possibly be replaced by business brought in by other countries. So, I do not believe that there aren't any other alternatives available.
In the end, nations make decisions that they believe are in their best interest, and they need to consider carefully all consequences of such decisions. It may be unfair to their people, but again, most of these governments were elected by the people, and therefore must take some level of responsibility for their government's action.
If readers feel that this thread is starting to deviate too much from the initial OP's question, feel free to report it to a moderator so that a separate thread can be created.
