Sea Shepherd espouses nonviolence, but could stand a lesson in using it
An arrest warrant has been issued by Japan for Captain Paul Watson, founder of the anti-whaling Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, for endangering the lives of Japanese whaling crews in the Antarctic this winter. According to The Guardian:
The Canadian, who founded Sea Shepherd in 1977, has proved a formidable nemesis for Japan’s whalers in recent years.
Earlier this month, the leader of Japan’s whaling fleet said the group’s guerilla tactics had forced it to return to port with just over half its intended catch of 935 minke whales.
Watson, 59, said the move was a “desperate” attempt to prevent Sea Shepherd from pursuing the whaling fleet during its next expedition to the Southern Ocean whale sanctuary at the end of this year.
While there’s no doubt the intentions of the Japanese whaling industry are malevolent, Sea Shepherd operates in murky waters as well. For instance, they have admitted to owning a cache of non-lethal weapons, such as sound cannons and photonic disrupters, both of which temporarily impair their target. They also throw stink bombs and slime that makes the ship’s deck too slippery to walk on—an especially dangerous weapon in the freezing Antarctic waters.
Yet, Sea Shepherd maintains it has a “strict policy of nonviolence, to not cause injury to those we oppose.” And they claim to have “an unblemished record in this regard.”
Having just days ago met some of the crew during a promotional visit to New York City, I don’t have the sense that this policy is intentionally disingenuous. Misguided? Absolutely. Anyone who volunteers to go out to sea and risk bodily harm to save whales should be commended, but the moment you start playing the same violent game as the whalers, you have compromised not only your just cause, but perhaps your best chance at winning.
While on board Sea Shepherd’s Steve Irwin and observing their high-tech operation I couldn’t help but wonder if they have ever considered or used other proven nonviolent tactics, such as organizing boycotts of whale meat or getting dock workers to refuse unloading, like when Chinese ships filled with weapons for Zimbabwe were denied port access along southern Africa.
Another missed opportunity seems to be the establishment of a relationship with the fishermen. Rather than physically challenge their livelihoods, Sea Shepherd could probably benefit from reaching out to these workers, who I’m sure have little ideological ties to their job. In fact, I would bet it’s a rather unpleasant job. Not to mention the fact that they work for an industry that knowingly violates international law. Could they too be victims of this industry? If so, what a tremendous chance for collaboration against a common enemy.
Without incorporating other strategies that go after the whaling industry’s pillars of support, as well as the culture that demands whale meat, it seems like the best Sea Shepherd can do is minimize the problem. Considering the amount of money and resources it takes to keep their operation running year after year, I have to wonder how financially sustainable it is in the long run. (Bob Barker and his millions won’t be around forever, after all). There’s also the question of environmental sustainability. It takes a lot of oil to power Sea Shepherd’s three ships and two helicopters. I’m not sure that totally fits in with their conservation-minded approach.
At the same time, however, I think there is value in following these whaling ships and documenting their abuses and legal violations. I just wonder if it’s possible for that to become one of many truly nonviolent tactics in their effort to save whales.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Waging Nonviolence. Waging Nonviolence said: Sea Shepherd espouses nonviolence, but could stand a lesson in using it (http://cli.gs/1zndG) [...]
While I fully understand and respect the intent of this article, I can’t help but wonder if it’s author is fully informed on the issue. The Sea Shepherd activists, while passionate, are in no way “playing the same violent game as the whalers”. That is a troubling and distorted comparison. If you have ever seen footage of a whale being killed you would know that it is a horrifying, sadistic, vicious act. It takes over 30 minutes for an adult whale to die, after being harpooned, shot repeatedly from the deck of the ship, stabbed, flailing around in agony, until it ultimately drowns in its own blood. To place throwing stink bombs and rotten butter in the same, or even similar, category, is naive at best. The soul of a person who would murder and butcher a majestic, defenseless animal is far, far different from one who would engage in relatively harmless harassment to stop that violence. One seeks to kill, the other does not.
Do not underestimate the spiteful determination of the Japanese government and the whaling industry. They are, as you correctly stated in this article, flagrantly breaking international law. The world community does nothing to stop them or even censure them. “documenting their abuses and legal violations” sounds good, but it will not change a thing. It hasn’t for years. The IWC is a worthless, corrupt organization, and even many powerful environmental groups have proven ineffectual in stopping this slaughter. Paul Watson has stated repeatedly that there would be no need for Sea Shepherd if the international community, Greenpeace, etc, took decisive action. I don’t know if you heard before you wrote this article, but it seems that even President Obama is considering overturning the ban on commercial whaling!
I completely agree with your position of nonviolent forms of protest and activism. That’s why I visit this site. But on issues involving animals, wildlife, etc, those methods, regrettably, seem less effective. The award-winning movie “The Cove” is a perfect example. Documentary films with activist messages are a nonviolent approach. But even a brilliant film like “The Cove” has not stopped the Taiji dolphin slaughter. If anything, Japan has taken an even more defiant stance because of the film’s success.
In conflicts between groups of humans, each side can organize and communicate in the methods of their choosing. But animals/wildlife cannot do that. Sea Shepherd is acting on behalf of marine mammals who cannot speak for themselves or fight back. Just keep in mind that the whalers WILL continue their behavior unless they are physically stopped. The whales are not living things to them. They are units of commodity. While I profoundly admire your general views regarding protest, and your suggestion that we appeal to the whalers and the fisherman, consider the reality that these are individuals who have knowingly murdered nursing whale mothers in front of their babies, individuals who have stood by and watched as the ocean turns red with blood.
Thank you Claudia.
This article is junk and rubbish. Save the whales, not the whalers.
I wonder if a whaler would care to die the way they kill them. I bet they would not.
Hello, Let me see if I understand you correctly. You would rather save a whale instead of a person. You have more respect for a whale than a person. Are you a serial killer or a Sadomasochism? If someone paid me a lot of money to kill a whale, I would kill a whale to support my family with food, shelter, and material things. Unless, you forgotten human beings have always been on top of the food chain. All animals are here to serve our needs, not the other way around. The U.S.A. Navy should arrest the Sea Shepherd crew and charge them as terrorists. ALso, I think you may need some professional help, if you feel whales are more imporant than a person’s life.
Hi there. Former US Navy surface officer here…
The Japanese whalers are in flagrant violation of international law. If the US Navy were to interdict anybody in this conflict, it should be the whalers.
The Sea Shepherds are attempting to enforce a commercial whaling ban that government are choosing to ignore, for political reasons. Governments should either nut up and enforce the law and deal with the political ramifications, or they should abandon it and face their own citizens’ outrage.
Sea Shepherds are perfectly within their legal rights to take direct action against illegal activities at sea.
As far as choosing between human life and the life of a whale, I agree with you. Human life takes priority. However, I would say that the Japanese should be held to the same standards. The actions of the Japanese whalers have been far more indiscreet than those of the Sea Shephards. Using LRADs on in-flight helos, T-boning a much smaller vessel, throwing flash grenades, and using high powered water cannons are far more dangerous acts than tossing rancid butter, and launching prop fowlers. And they are also being employed in the act of a crime, which makes them that much more insidious.
Somebody has to stop the raping of our environment… if not governments, which are owned by corporate and special interests, then citizens.
lets see, threatening human lives or killing animals? Sorry human lives win every time. Perhaps the Japanese should come to america and do the same to the Cow slaughter houses? There are legal ways to handle this. You cant threaten peoples lives because you disagree with what they do when its legal. yes the Japanese are following the letter of the law. maybe not the spirit but then thats where these peoples efforts should be pointed at.
i hope the you claudia are a vegan otherwise you are a very big hypocrite.
David,
I am not just a vegetarian. I am a vegan. And no I don’t wear leather or fur. Not a hypocrite. Nice try, though. FAIL.
David,
When governments refuse to police the activities in the far reaches of the seas, how can they possibly enforce the laws?
The legal remedies to which you refer are ineffective as long as there is no will to enforce them.
Hi Claudia,
I meant to respond to your original comment a while ago. Sorry for the delay! I really appreciated what you had to say. It’s clearly a tough issue and one I don’t claim to be an expert on. But in terms of nonviolent activism, there is a strategic advantage to refraining from any act of violence, no matter how “relatively harmless” it may seem by comparison. Since stopping the whalers is a moral cause, it is important for activists to maintain the moral high ground. Activists must be able to prove the justness of their cause. They can’t do that if they are threatening the safety of other humans. Many people will be turned off by that. And causes need some form of popular support to succeed. It doesn’t matter how well funded or staffed Sea Shepherd is. They alone can’t bring an end to whaling. Culture must change. And for culture to change. Outreach must be successful. And for outreach to be successful–it must be attempted. Perhaps I am naive as you say, but I do not believe the whalers are beyond redemption. If Nazis can be overwhelmed by nonviolence and if dictators can be deposed by nonviolence, so can the whaling industry.
Bryan,
Thanks for the response! No need to apologize. Nice to hear from you.
I envy your optimism about this issue. I could use some of that! I’m glad you mentioned culture because that is where traditions and practices, whether productive or destructive, reside. And culture is a very difficult thing to change. In the issue of Japan’s whaling industry, culture is used as justification.
I think what discourages me so much is the ingrained idea of “Humans Number One!” that is so common among people of all cultures. It’s certainly not exclusive to the Japanese whaling industry. My fellow animal rights activists would call it “speciesism”. Coincidentally, it is in full arrogant display right here on this comment thread. The above postings by John and David are perfect examples of it, with the requisite snark. Even if we put aside for the moment that they both obviously misread your article and are uninformed of what Sea Shepherd actually does – which is NOT killing people or TRYING to kill people (?!) – they still employ the false argument that any non-human creature is somehow “beneath” humans, rather than just different from humans. This kind of attitude is why the human race struggles with even the concept of SHARING the planet with animals. People like John and David can only see things in terms of dominance and hierarchy. And they set up these childish contests about some generic “human life” versus any “animal life” and how the human life always “wins”, etc. We have become so disconnected and isolated from all other life on earth, we can barely comprehend the notion of NOT killing wildlife for our own purposes, NOT exploiting animals for our own purposes. It’s stunning to me that we refuse to simply leave them alone to live their lives. I’m curious as to how much whale meat John and David consume on a daily basis. I’m guessing zero. Yet they frame the whale hunt as some noble cause.
Bryan, I don’t mean to hold you responsible for other posters’ comments. I’m sorry if it came across that way. I just get so disappointed at the posturing and the gratuitous personal attacks, such as “needing professional help”, and “you better be a vegan or else you’re a big hypocrite” kind of thing. And it relates to your point about changing culture through outreach. If we can’t change people like John and David, how can we convince the Japanese?
I hope John and David have taken a good close look at the pictures of the spreading, toxic, disgusting oil spill in the Gulf. Because if that doesn’t compel them to reconsider human superiority then nothing will. We’re the ones who have dumped that sludge there. We’re the ones who shit on this planet and pollute Mother Earth who sustains us. It’s US. Not the whales.
Claudia
PS- If either John or David reads this, my response to their “human versus animal” showdown is this: my beloved family dog (animal) versus Charles Manson (human)? The dog wins. Manson dies. A humpback whale (animal) or Osama bin Laden (human)? The whale wins. Bin Laden dies. The feral cat I feed in my garden every day (animal) or a serial child rapist (human)? Yeah, sorry, the scruffy cat wins. The child rapist dies. ANY human life over ANY animal? Or as David said, “human lives win every time”? Wow. You might want to rethink your rigid, simplistic, painfully prejudiced and tone-deaf notion of human superiority. In fact, it’s so unbelievably stupid I don’t know why I even wasted time responding to it.
Nazis were overwhelmed by extreme violence – WWII.
Sometimes direct action is the only action that yields results.
Great posts Claudia, i commend you for not just getting angry, but actually rebuffing the rediculous “Human dominance” argument in a concise and well structured reply, instead of just getting mad.
Why do we always assume that because we can we should? Why is it OK with the majority of people that in the past hundred years humans have caused the extinction of exponetially more animal species than became extinct in the prior sixty-five million years? Why is it alright to continue employing insainely cruel and, quite frankly, stomach churning practices that provide little to no benifit to the “All dominant human race”?
We have so completely seperated ourselves from our true environment that most of us couldnt even grasp the concept of a harmonious and mutually benificial relationship with our Mother Earth. Instead we rape her repeatedly and destroy her most beautiful features for our own selfish desires (Dont dare call them needs, they are not). But we live our lives in a series of boxes, no wonder we’ve lost touch.
For the record I am not a vegan, actually I’m not even a vegetarian. I hunt, I have taken the life of another living creature, many times in fact. I have killed for food, for clothing, for protection. I have lived in nature, with nature; to deny that killing is sometimes necessary is naive, although in todays world I guess one could get along reasonably well eating only that which grows from the ground. I do not eat processed meat or poultry from the super market, I find the practices of most modern corporate farms abhorent and on the same level as the Japanese whalers (The difference being, of course domestic cattle are not in danger of disapearing forever). Its all about balance, about establishing a sustainable symbiotic relationship with our fellow earthlings. We cannot and will not ever accomplish this if we believe humans are somehow superior to everything else.
thanks.
Humans cannot possibly win the war against the planet. Its time to realize we are residents, not owners.