David @ Tokyo

The Pacific Islands Forum says in it's vision statement that it seeks, inter alia

"a Pacific region that is respected for ... the sustainable management of its resources"

Kiribati, Nauru, Tuvalu have all made clear their support for the sustainable management of marine resources, the Solomon Islands is home to peoples who utilise small cetacean resources, and the Marshall Islands also has declared it's interest in international forums related to conservation of marine resources (apparently they eat turtles there - didn't know that!).

So remind me, where does New Zealand stand in all of this? Perfect timing - NZ Foreign Minister Winston Peters has just told the UN that

New Zealand had a commitment to the Pacific Islands Forum goal of a "region that is respected for the quality of its governance, the sustainable management of its resources, the full observance of democratic values and for its defence and promotion of human rights".

This sounds promising - New Zealand agrees with the idea of sustainable management of resources, just like it's neighbours in the Pacific Islands Forum. Perhaps New Zealand may display a more enlightened stance at next year's IWC meeting, in line with this commitment?

Winston also however made an interesting indirect reference to the situation at the IWC:

"New Zealand is determined to seek out the benefits of the Pacific's significance and guard against the threats – among which I include chequebook diplomacy."

These comments are interesting from Winston. They seem to be largely compatible with the recent comments of Tuvaluan Prime Minister Maatia Toafa protesting suggestions from Murray McCully that New Zealand should seek to tie aid to votes:

"We are an aid-dependent country and we feel that we should be left to make our decisions without any influences"

Rightly so. Winston also passed comment on McCully's musings himself:

Peters, who heads the country’s NZ$160 million Pacific aid programme, said New Zealand will “respect Pacific Islands countries as sovereign nations who make their own policy decisions.”

“Our preference is to talk with countries to understand their perspectives, rather than simply telling them they are wrong,” he said.

Commendable. Winston presumably also thus supports the comments of Marshall Islands Marine Resources Authority, Glen Joseph made prior to the IWC 58 meeting, which noted that the Marshall Islands would make decisions

"on our own grounds and our own judgement of how the issues are presented at the commission"

Winston presumably also accepts the 2005 call from Tuvalu that they be left to make their own decisions free of pressure.

We can but wait and see whether the rest of New Zealand's politicians and excitable media are able to develop such good sense prior to the IWC 59 meeting in 2007.


Winston made some comments on the whaling issue when speaking in Japan recently:

Responding to a question on the controversial topic of whaling, which has drawn strong comments from both Japan and New Zealand, the minister said he understood the description of the issue as a cultural one.

"My people have been in New Zealand over a thousand years," said Peters, who is half Maori. "We didn't just arrive there yesterday. And the indigenous people of New Zealand are Maori and they ate whales."

"We used to eat our pigeons too, and our kiwis and all our rare birds ... but we stopped because their numbers were diminishing. Not that we don't have a sweet tooth for that sort of food, but we just thought that with the interests long term and the character of our country, and these birds being important to us, we should change our ways."

"We make far more money out of taking tourists to watch whales, including thousands of Japanese tourists, than we'll ever make out of selling it as a fish meat on the market."

One gets the impression that IWC meetings would proceed a little more smoothly and rationally if Winston were representing us there instead of our current delegation.

Labels: IWC vote influence, Tuvalu

A good article appeared at www.stuff.co.nz on Tuvalu's stance at the IWC. The journo does a reasonable job of putting across Tuvalu's position as it is, as opposed to what anti-whaling NGOs and governments would say it is (kudos to Michael Field - well done).

Amongst other things, Tuvalu

• believes in the sustainable use of marine resources
• wants to act in the best interests of its people

This is of course quite reasonable, especially from a small island nation dependant on the resources of the ocean around it for development potential.

From the New Zealand side:

• it's "bad news"
• "the Pacific has been turning against us"
  

Who is it bad news for? I think it's great news for the people of Tuvalu that their government is putting their interests ahead of interests of people in foreign countries.

And why is this seen as the Pacific turning against New Zealand? Were the Pacific nations ever opposed to the sustainable use of marine resources? On the contrary, it's New Zealand who abandoned the principle of sustainable use when it rejoined the IWC in 1975 after earlier quitting the organization.

New Zealand is a fairly developed nation, whose economy is not overly reliant on marine resources for expansion. 80% of New Zealanders live in cities.

Look at Tuvalu. It does not have the natural resources available to New Zealand. What does it have?

Fish. Only fish. That's it. Nothing else.

New Zealand may be able to afford itself the luxury of the odd irrational air-headed "environmental" policy, but Tuvalu has no room to compromise. Tuvalu must ensure that it's marine resources are managed properly because they have nothing else.

The full article is duplicated below for posterity. Congratulations, once again Tuvalu.

Tuvalu sides with whaling nations

11 May 2006

By MICHAEL FIELD

A bid by Conservation Minister Chris Carter to persuade Tuvalu to vote with New Zealand to protect whales has failed, with the tiny Pacific archipelago saying it favours sustainable use.

News that the Tuvaluan Government said it was grateful for aid from Australia and New Zealand but wanted to act in the best interests of its people has been met with disappointment.

The decision comes before a crucial International Whaling Commission meeting at which Japan may take control of the 66-nation body.

New Zealand's whaling commissioner, Sir Geoffrey Palmer, said Tuvalu's stance was bad news.

"It's going to be exceedingly close and therefore every vote counts."

A senior Tuvaluan Government official was quoted as saying: "Our position has never changed since we joined the International Whaling Commission. We are for the sustainable use of whatever resources we have, be it whales, fish, forestry, land.

"Whilst we appreciate assistance from both countries, Tuvalu should be allowed as a sovereign nation to make its independent decision on what is best for its people."

Mr Carter was not available for comment yesterday but a spokesman said despite relationship-building between the two countries "it was never expected the meeting would produce an overnight change in Tuvalu's position".

The diplomatic failure for Mr Carter comes as nations lined up with Japan meet in Tokyo today to plan their strategy for the IWC meeting from June 16 to 20 in the Caribbean nation of St Kitts and Nevis.

On paper Japan has a majority of the 66 member nations in the IWC. To overturn the 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling would require a three-quarters majority. This is considered unlikely, but a simple majority vote would amount to a big win for Japan and fellow whaling nations Norway and Iceland.

Mr Carter is to visit the Solomons, Kiribati and Nauru before the IWC meeting. Sir Geoffrey said the lobbying was important "as the Pacific has been turning against us in the International Whaling Commission".

Labels: Chris Carter, IWC vote influence, Tuvalu

Tuvalu can stand proud as a nation after it's officials rejected NZ Conservation Minister Chris Carter's meddling in their democratic processes.

Labels: Chris Carter, IWC vote influence, Tuvalu

NZ Conservation Minister, Chris Carter is apparently off to Tuvalu.

Tuvalu has voted with the pro-whaling nations in the past, but Mr Carter hopes he can persuade it to abstain on some critical issues.

A disgrace. Tuvalu is a sovereign nation, and it's people are quite capable of understanding whaling issues and making a decision by themselves, without Chris Carter's guidance. Then again, perhaps Carter may learn a thing or two out of the discussion, so it may be a useful exercise afterall.

Tuvalu has made its position on the issue quite clear.

Prime Minister Maatia Toafa has called on Australia and New Zealand to allow Tuvalu to be able to make a decision on its own, without pressure.

As a supposedly responsible Minister, Chris Carter should rightfully have heeded this request.

Labels: Chris Carter, IWC vote influence, Tuvalu