Words by

Micah Garen

Photo by

The Reykjavík Grapevine Archives

The government collapse was a gift for the pro-whaling Independence Party 

The last weeks of the month brought an unlikely October surprise to Icelandic voters. Thanks to the sudden collapse of the government and a breach of protocol by the Independence Party, whaling — an issue the majority of Icelanders would like to see never resurface — is looming large again.   

The inglorious ending of the odd-bedfellowed coalition government and the hasty departure of the Left-Green Movement from the interim government left an opening for Independence Party MP and fill-in Prime Minister Bjarni Benediktsson. After taking over the Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Fisheries in what should have been a caretaker role, Bjarni quickly appointed Jón Gunnarsson, a staunch pro-whaler from the Independence Party, as a special representative to the ministry. Bjarni then announced that an application for a whaling permit had landed on his desk. 

“In my opinion this is clearly an abuse of power and legally questionable,” says Valgerður Árnadóttir, a representative for the anti-whaling movement Hvalavinir. “If the interim government decides to issue a whaling license it most likely violates administrative law. Hvalavinir, and other environmental and animal welfare associations in Iceland will contest the decision, and most likely the Parliamentary Ombudsman will investigate the matter. If he concludes that this breaks the administrative law it can lead to [Bjarni] being pushed to resign.” 

Vala points out, though, that the Independence party has pulled this move before. “Einar K. Guðfinsson, former minister of fisheries, approved a five year whaling permit on his last day in office in 2009, after the government fell because of the Icelandic financial crisis.” 

The government is playing coy with the issue. Dúi Jóhannsson, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, declined to comment, saying in writing “there is very little information to provide on this subject due to a recent change in our government.” 

When questioned about the appropriateness of issuing a whaling license with elections on the horizon, Bjarni said that, “historically we have seen a similar situation where an application was processed after the coalition ended and before the elections. This time all I can say is that the application will be processed at the ministry and it is not timely to say if it will be accepted or in what manner it will be handled in the ministry, that is up to the process that is ahead of us.” 

No common ground 

The difference of stances across party lines was clear at the Nordic Council meeting held in Reykjavík in late October. Independence Party MP Bryndís Harðardóttir expressed support for Bjarni’s right to issue a whaling license, saying “as the law says you can hunt whales then I think the minister should give out an allowance to do that.” She also pointed to the supposed sustainability of the practice, saying “environmental issues are so important, that is of course biodiversity…if it’s hunting whales or fish — all are creatures, it is the most important thing that it is sustainable.”  

When reminded that the International Whaling Commission had a catch limit of zero for commercial whaling, Bryndís countered that Iceland, as an “independent country” can decide for itself and whaling won’t be stopped “because someone else feels that we should not do it.” 

Social Democratic Alliance MP Oddný G. Harðardóttir is of a different opinion. “My party and I don’t want whale hunting to be allowed. We can not accept that this government will give out a license two weeks before elections — that is not right to do.” Oddný said she’s hopeful that anti-whaling legislation will be put to a vote should the Social Democrats be invited to form government after November 30. 

Uncertain futures 

With the election fast approaching, what will a new government mean for the future of whaling in Iceland? Will this bloody chapter in Iceland’s history finally be brought to a close, or will it plod on with a renewed license and continued lack of purpose? 

“It’s a desperate move from a party that knows that it won’t be in power for at least four or more years,” says Andrés Ingi Jónsson, a member of parliament for the Pirate Party. Andrés introduced a bill in 2023 to ban whaling, but it has been stuck in parliamentary doldrums with little sign of movement on the horizon. 

“We have to call it dishonest the way they are dealing with things,” Andrés continues. “The Independence Party breaks down the government and while they are in a caretaker administration, they are going to use the opportunity to extend whaling for a considerable amount of time. Everyone seems to be in agreement that the future of whaling should be decided in parliament — extending whaling shouldn’t happen without parliamentary debate. But they are doing it by decree.” 

An international audience  

At the Arctic Circle conference in October, Andrés moderated a panel on ecocide and the growing legal movement to hold people who destroy the global ecosystem criminally liable. Noticing that Hvalur CEO Kristján Loftsson was in attendance, Andrés made a point of mentioning whales in his opening remarks, saying that northern lights and whales are extraordinary treasures of Iceland that remind us of how connected we are to nature. 

At last year’s conference, Kristján confronted a group of Maori leaders who had come to talk about a new initiative gaining attention around the world: giving whales legal personhood. Speaking from the back of the hall, the head of Iceland’s sole whaling company challenged Ralph Chami, a former IMF economist who was with the Maori delegation to speak about the economic benefits of protecting whales — what he refers to as a blue-green future. Chami has estimated the ecosystem services of a great whale, like the fin whales Loftsson hunts, at over $2 million USD. 

Iceland left the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in 1992 in protest over the moratorium on commercial whaling, but rejoined in 2002 taking an “exception” to the moratorium. The country began whaling again soon after — a move that was heavily criticized. The U.S. even “certified” Iceland under the Pelly Amendment in 2011 for violating the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wildlife Fauna and Flora — a step short of sanctions.  

There is a strong argument that Iceland is violating its international obligations under the IWC and other international agreements.   

In May of this year, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) issued a momentous advisory opinion that countries have a legal obligation to do everything they can to mitigate the impacts of climate change on the sea based on the UN Convention for the Law on the Sea (UNCLOS). The advisory opinion requires countries to enhance carbon sinks, which whales are. Any of the 170 member states can now sue over climate obligations, which could open the floodgates to climate litigation.  

Australia successfully sued Japan at the Internal Court of Justice in 2010 for violating UNCLOS, which put an end to Japan’s illegal whaling in the Antarctic. One could argue that both Japan and Iceland are in violation of UNCLOS now. 

Boris Niehaus/Hard To Port

High stakes and big uncertainty 

There are indeed signs that the Independence Party’s takeover of the fisheries ministry is a last desperate act of a party willing to go down with Hvalur’s ships. Four of the party’s most ardent pro-whalers are not running for parliament in these elections. Meanwhile, Japan’s launch of a new whaling ship this summer suggests the country won’t continue importing whale meat from Iceland. That’s a massive market loss for Hvalur, which currently sells almost all its whale products to Japan.  

The stakes are high. A new five year whaling license could mean as many as 700 vulnerable fin whales being killed before the end of the decade. Fin whale numbers have been decimated by industrial whaling, with an estimated 90% of the population killed off since the start of commercial whaling 150 years ago. There is very little scientific research on their current population numbers, though one study on populations off the coast of Europe in 2022 found a more than 50% decrease in their numbers in the past eight years.   

Bjarkey Olsen Gunnarsdóttir, a Left-Green MP who served as fisheries minister prior to the government’s dissolution in October, convened a committee earlier this year to evaluate whaling in light of Iceland’s obligations under international law. The committee was set to deliver its findings by the end of November, but, with the turmoil of the elections, that will almost certainly be delayed. The committee has become an orphan now that the Left-Greens withdrew from the interim government. There is the possibility that Bjarni might end its work altogether. 

All eyes on the ballot box 

For now, it seems clear that the future of whaling in Iceland will be closely tied to the Nov. 30 election and the possible passage of the anti-whaling bill in Parliament.   

“The anti-whaling bill would need a simple majority in Parliament to pass,” Andrés explains. “We know roughly which parties support the bill on paper, we will have to see how that translates into action. The bill has members from the Pirate Party, the People’s Party, Viðreisn and Samfylkingin — but not all those parties have adopted formal anti-whaling policies. The Left-Greens have a formal anti-whaling policy,” Andrés adds, “but are not supporting the bill.” 

Taking a stance on whaling in a party’s election platform is not just a battle for votes, it’s a testament of will. “The next ministers will have to have the political will to reverse a decision on whaling,” Andrés concludes. “If we get a good government, a government that has a proper green outlook, then hopefully it is more likely than not that we will not have whaling next summer.”