All Global News on One Page

Last week I had the opportunity to spend a week aboard The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society’s vessels, The Steve Irwin and The Bob Barker upon their return to port in Hobart, Tasmania after successfully shutting down Japanese whaling operations in the southern ocean whale sanctuary–a victory that has been 7 years in the making.
Media and film crews were on hand to welcome home the captains and crew along with family, friends and supporters who showed up with fresh fruit and produce as gestures of gratitude for the ocean defenders, some who spent 94 days at sea without fresh provisions. Australian Green party member and long time Sea Shepherd advocate, Bob Brown held a press conference with Captain Paul Watson to express his support and appreciation for this year’s monumental victory for the whales.
In June 2010, a compromise deal proposed by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) would have allowed for the exchange of legalized whaling in return for bringing the hunt under IWC control. While conservationists were somewhat relieved when the deal was ultimately forfeited, the concept of compromise simply does not exist on Watson’s radar who has no qualms in admitting that first and foremost he represents the interests of his clients–the

“Yesterday I did not know what an eco-terrorist was. Now it appears that I am one?”
- Sea Shepherd Deckhand Amanda Caldwell
When Japanese whalers, Canadian sealers, Costa Rican shark poachers, and Libyan bluefin tuna poachers call Sea Shepherd an “eco-terrorist” organization, I always have the same response: “Okay already, arrest us, or shut the hell up!” This constant, misguided yammering about alleged terrorism every time someone tries to nonviolently stop some thug from clubbing seals, harpooning whales, or finning sharks is downright ignorant, and just plain silly.
What exactly is an eco-terrorist? There is no known law defining the alleged crime of eco-terrorism. And what kind of crimes would an eco-terrorist commit? There’s arson, but Sea Shepherd has never burned anything. There’s bomb making, planting, throwing, and conspiring about bombing, but we don’t do anything like that

TWITTER: @GreenNewsReport.
The ‘GNR’ is also now available on your cell phone via Stitcher Radio’s mobile app!.
IN TODAY’S RADIO REPORT: Heavier storms now definitely linked to climate change… But one MT legislator says “Bring it on”; Score one for the whales; PLUS: Oil subsidies, shmoil-shmubsidies — Republicans vs. Obama’s budget and Big Bird vs. Big Oil

A U.S. response, with teeth, is needed to stop Iceland’s violations of international treaties.
Weighing up to 80 tons and almost twice the length of a school bus, the massive fin whale — known as the greyhound of the sea for its swimming speed — was the victim of decades of commercial slaughter that killed the whales by the tens of thousands each year. Then, in 1986, with the species on the brink of extinction, the nations of the world agreed to a moratorium on commercial whaling, and this magnificent animal got a reprieve.
Except, that is, in Iceland. Today, over a quarter of a century after the moratorium took effect, Iceland is escalating its hunting and trading of fin whales (and other whale species), in disregard for international law, economic reason and ecological sanity.
Last month, the Obama administration went on the

Today NRDC and other conservation groups filed a petition with the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Interior to impose trade sanctions against Iceland for its escalation of commercial whaling and trade in whale products in clear defiance of international law. Click here to read the press release.
Despite the international ban on commercial whaling that took effect in 1986, Iceland’s whaling has dramatically increased in recent years. Iceland has unilaterally authorized its whalers to slaughter up to 150 fin whales and 150 minke whales every year between 2009 and 2013. In 2010 alone, Icelandic whalers killed 148 endangered fin whales and 60 minke whales. Fin whales are the second largest whale on the planet and are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Iceland’s illegal action not only defies the International Whaling Commission (IWC), but it also flies in the face of the best scientific advice calculated by the IWC Scientific Committee. IWC scientists concluded that removing more than 46 fin whales from the population per year is unsustainable.
In addition to increasing its slaughter of whales, Iceland is also increasing its trade in whale meat and products. In 2010 alone, Iceland shipped more than 750 tons of whale meat and products to Japan.
The United States has issued a powerful statement in response to Iceland’s horrific practice. “The United States strongly opposes Iceland’s defiance of the commercial whaling ban,” said Commerce Secretary Gary Locke. U.S. Commissioner to the IWC Monica Medina also voiced concern: “I am deeply disappointed in Iceland’s actions. Iceland is disregarding the global moratorium on commercial whaling, as well as the global ban on trade in whale meat … send[ing] a clear message that Iceland is not interested in cooperative international conservation of whales.”
We’ve urged the Obama Administration to now follow up these strong statements with direct action. The Pelly Amendment of the Fishermen’s Protective Act authorizes the President to impose trade sanctions against another country for “diminishing the effectiveness” of conservation agreements: in Iceland’s case, the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) – which bans commercial whaling – and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) – which prohibits international commercial trade in whale products.
The United States did certify Iceland under the Pelly Amendment back in 2004, although it pursued diplomatic solutions rather than trade sanctions at the time. Given Iceland’s escalation in commercial whaling and trade, however, it is clearly time for more than words. It is time to put pressure on Iceland’s illegal whaling industry by imposing trade sanctions.
The Pelly petition identifies several Icelandic companies as potential targets for trade sanctions, including major seafood industry players that are directly tied to Iceland’s whaling industry.
We urge the President to act quickly under the Pelly Amendment and impose trade sanctions against Iceland for its escalation in commercial whaling and trade.
This post was first published on NRDC’s Switchboard blog.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Junichi, Toru and Kumi after the verdictJeremy Sutton-Hibbert / GreenpeaceAfter more than two years of political prosecution, my colleagues Junichi Sato and Toru Suzuki were this week handed a one-year jail sentence, suspended for three years. Their crime: exposing corruption in the Japanese whaling programme.
Over the course of their trial, Junichi and Toru produced substantial evidence of embezzlement within the decaying relic that is Japan’s whaling industry.
When I came to Japan in February for the start of this trial I was shocked that Junichi and Toru were even in court. What I saw in the Aomori court is deeply concerning.
The judges recognised that “murkiness” existed in the industry regarding the handling of whale meat, however, despite this and clear contradictions in the official version of events, the judges instead chose to deny citizens the right to investigate the misuse of public resources.
The judges ruled that the harm done to the reputation of the transportation company from whose depot Junichi and Toru seized the evidence of embezzlement outweighed the public interest served by the investigation, and found that enforcing Japan’s laws against theft and trespass in this case does not violate freedom of expression protected by treaties Japan has ratified. This runs in stark contrast with the opinion of a UN working group, which slammed the authorities for their handling of this case.
Junichi and Toru have been completely transparent, honest and consistent at all times during their investigation, arrest, interrogation and trial. In contrast the prosecution case against them has been marred by cover ups of critical documents, inconsistent and plain contradictory witness accounts.
Junichi and Toru are appealing this wholly disproportionate and unjust verdict, and Greenpeace will stand shoulder to shoulder with them as they do. Their case is a timely reminder that those who peacefully protest and otherwise stand up to wrongdoing should not be treated so poorly by the authorities.
For close to 40 years, Greenpeace has campaigned against significant environmental and social problems around the world. Our fragile earth needs a voice, and our activists have helped it be heard since 1971 through non-violent direct action.
The deteriorating state of the world’s climate, acidifying oceans and increasing loss of biodiversity has made activism more important now than ever before. However, as this need for committed activists grows, there is also a disturbing trend of authorities meeting peaceful civil dissent with harsh and disproportionate responses.
We saw this with the Red Carpet Four’s arrest and treatment in Denmark during last year’s UN Climate Conference, we saw it a few weeks ago when warships were dispatched to prevent a peaceful protest against oil exploration in the Arctic near Greenland, and we have definitely seen it with the Tokyo Two, whose initial detention without charge for 23 days has been declared a breach of their human rights by the United Nations Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. Their prosecution was also considered political in nature by the same working group, and the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights expressed similar concerns.
Protest in support of Junichi and Toru in BelgiumPhilip Reynaers / GreenpeaceGreenpeace activists are keenly aware of any risks they may take with life, limb, and liberty, and all are prepared face the consequences of their actions. Activists are not above the law, but neither are the authorities. When activists challenge the authorities they do so in the public interest and not for personal gain. It is unacceptable for authorities to abuse their power to try to silence them.
Junichi and Toru have already been cleared in the court of international public opinion. This verdict will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on civil society in Japan, as it casts a disturbing shadow over human rights. Junichi and Toru’s “crime” has really been to shame the authorities. When political revenge and preserving the status quo takes precedent over improving the quality of democracy, then it is the duty of all to take a stand.

Follow Kumi Naidoo on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/kuminaidoo

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com