From 21 to 25 June 2010 the 62th Session of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) was held in Agadir, Morocco. The meeting brought together 600 delegates from some 80 countries, in addition to Ministers, scientists, experts and NGO’s representatives. Representatives of Russian Chukotka Association of Traditional whale hunters who observed the meeting were satisfied with the meeting results.

The same volume quotas for aboriginal hunting of gray and bowhead whales in 2010 (135 gray and 5 bowhead whales) were confirmed. In 2010, unused strikes of gray whale can be transferred to another year, and also only whales brought on shore will be counted.

Due to the large number of harvested non-edible whales, so called, stinky whale (because of their rancid, medicinal stench and taste), the IWC decided to ignore the striking of 10 whales this year.

After years of debate, the indigenous peoples of Greenland were finally able to get a quota of 9 humpbacks in addition to 178 minke whales, 10 fin whales, and 2 bowhead whales. This positive solution was supported by the delegations of indigenous peoples involved in aboriginal whaling.

Thus, Vladimir Etylin from Chukotka said that indigenous whaling in the Arctic is under the pressure of IWC power. Arctic indigenous communities fear that their traditional food can be taken from them. The indigenous people of Greenland, Alaska and Chukotka should not be blamed for the global reduction of whales. It is countries and industry that since the 18th century have continued to destroy whale habitats and earn money at the expense of nature.

The key issue of the IWC meeting was the future of the IWC itself – a question that originated from the ongoing conflict between the so-called whaling and anti-whaling countries. After lengthy discussions the question remained open but all members wanted the organization to become as relevant, credible and effective a conservation and management body as possible.

Regarding scheduling of the next IWC meeting, the IWC Secretariat announces: "Although the Commission did agree to hold a meeting in 2011 we have (as yet) not received an offer from any member government to host the meeting. The venue for next year is therefore currently unknown."

 

.

Close to a hundred years ago, after having viewed the film "In the Land of the Headhunters", director Edward Curtis' cinematic portrayal of "full-blooded" Kwakiutl life on the North West coast of America, one film critic wrote in his column: "The Indian mind is, I believe, constitutionally incapable of acting; it cannot even grasp the meaning of acting as we understand it [..] They are natural in every move [..]"

Since then, the idea of constitutional sincerity of the native mind has stood the test of time. One more proof of the power of this idea over the mind of the general public was screened in the Polar Cinema theatre of the recently completed Oslo Science Conference (OSC), i.e., in the form of the feature film "Inuk" by filmmaker Mike Magidson.

Or rather, in the form of the reactions of the audience to the preview of the film that will officially open at the Inuit Circumpolar Council's upcoming General Assembly in Nuuk. According to the official weblog of the OSC, “powerful and authentic” was the response of a packed cinema.

During the audience questions session following the OSC Polar Cinema preview, director Mike Magidson, screenwriter and anthropologist Jean-Michel Huctin, and lead character Ole Hammeken played along with the commonly held belief in indigenous incapability of pretense, dissimulation, and acting anything other than what we are.

“We wanted to tell the real story”, Jean-Michel Huctin said to the audience. Paradoxically, this ambition of the filmmakers meant turning from documentary to the feature film format or to this particular format in which being what you are and acting it imperceptibly blend into each other. The result is a hybrid that at the same time is deemed authentic and real.

The real story, as it is, centers round a long dog sled trip on which Inuk, a 16 year old boy who is taken away from his alcoholic mother and placed in an orphanage, gets teamed up with seasoned bear hunter Ikuma. Ikuma helps him get to grips with the negligences of a low-life upbringing and get back in contact with his true origin in the indigenous hunting culture.

About the fact that there are no professional actors in the film, Mike Magidson told the audience in Oslo: “They are ordinary people playing roles close to their real lives: teenagers from a home for neglected Inuit children and local seal hunters. This illustrates just how authentic the film is.”

There is also something about the location of the film, Uummannaq and surrounding nature in North-West Greenland, something peculiar, authentic and yet fictitious. The story of Uummannaq and its inhabitants acting themselves goes back at least to 1933 when German director Arnold Fanck shot the search and rescue drama “S.O.S. Eisberg” in this area. Half a century later, in 1986, the Danish film “Tukuma” was also shot on this location.

Since then, a number of films, several of which features Ole Hammeken as a local hunter, have been set in Uummannaq and surroundings. Besides “Inuk”, a drama-documentary entitled “Silent Snow” directed by Jan van den Berg was also pre-released at the OSC Polar Cinema. Hammeken and one or two others play roles “close to their real lives” in both films.

Moreover, impacts of climate change are staged by both productions. In “Inuk” the discourse on climate change is suggested via a flashback scene from Inuk’s early childhood that shows him experience his own father fall through treacherously thin ice and drown. Later in the film, the same thing is about to  happen to Ikuma, however, now Inuk is big and strong enough to pull the unfortunate bear hunter back up on the ice and bring him to the shelter of a hunting cabin.

Yet, one of the really great merits of the film “Inuk” and its makers is that it puts climate change and aboriginal culture into perspective by linking both to the social challenges, the facts of child neglect and substance abuse, that make up the true story of many a modern day Arctic indigenous community.

As, moreover, it is beautifully shot and well edited, and as members of the non-professional cast, despite constitutional incapabilities, manage to pull off some pretty convincing performances and stand out fotogenically from the silver screen – in particular Hammeken and Gaaba Petersen as Inuk – this film appears as one of the grand clous of the OSC, not only with regard to indigenous imprints on the conference, but altogether.

This is all the more remarkable as indigenous people, to the extent that they appeared at all, did so as objects of social scientific scrutiny rather than as participants. Social science itself had barely managed to carve out a niche for itself at the natural science dominated conference. And whereas scientist of whatever sort have funding secured to go to conferences, the organizers had not managed to get space agency funding in place for indigenous participants.

True, a sizeable Saami delegation had pitched laavu tents in front of the conference venue and organized panel debates and food tasting events. Professor Ole Henrik Magga of the Saami University College and Mr. Sergei Kharyuchi of the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) both adressed the 2500 conference attendants during one of the morning plenaries. And, rounding of indigenous contributions in Oslo, the Association of World Reindeer Herders as well intervened, they too with a film that got presented by the association’s chair, Mr. Mikhail Pogodaev.

The Arctic Council working group on Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, and Response (EPPR) has completed its first meeting of 2010. The meeting took place in the coal mining town of Vorkuta, Komi Republic of the Russian Federation, on 16-18 June. The town is located just above the Arctic circle, 3 hours flight or 48 hours train ride north of Moscow, and home to some 85,000 inhabitants. Formerly, it was infamous for being a main centre of the Soviet Gulag system of forced labor concentration camps.

The hosts of the present EPPR meeting, the Ministry of Emergency Situations (EMERCOM) and the city of Vorkuta, had spared no efforts in welcoming and entertaining the meeting attendants in an overwhelmingly splendid manner. The EPPR delegates were flown in to Vorkuta in a corporate EMERCOM jet and, within Vorkuta, transported by bus and everywhere escorted and saluted by officers of the Emergency Ministry.

The meeting was garnished with social events of stunning theatrical performances and lavish banquets as well as excursions to the city’s mine rescue service, Mining College, and Museum. Agenda items of the meeting included presentations on various issues related to Arctic Emergencies, Search and Rescue, and hazardous substances, as well as workshops on radioactive irradiation and oil spills.

In addition to the national delegations of the Arctic states, WWF Russia was represented at the meeting as were the Inuvialuit Game Council and IPS. RAIPON, however, was not represented at the meeting, nor was any of the other Permanent Participants, despite the fact that EPPR has expressed that it wishes to involve indigenous peoples in on-going and future projects.

Following the 27 May Deputy Ministerial, Friday 28 may saw yet another innovation on the Arctic Council schedule as the first ever Information Day of the Arctic Council (IDAC) was successfully carried through. According to the plan of the Senior Arctic Officials, IDACs are to take place every second year.

On this occasion, in addition to the SAOs, Permanent Participants, Working Groups, and Observers of the Arctic Council participated. Paradoxically, the media were not invited as, apparently, the purpose of the IDAC is to improve communication within the council itself. In particular, that is, between SAOs and Permanent Participants, on the one hand, and, on the other, Working Groups and Observers.

The first half of the Information Day was filled by presentations by each of the 6 Arctic Council working groups, the second half by presentations made by Observer States and organizations, as well as by Ad Hoc Observers. Adhering to the IDAC concept, Arctic Council member states and Permanent Participants remained listeners and commentators.

All in all, the Information Day offered an excellent overview of activities, priorities, strategic plans, interconnections, -relations, and –dependencies of, as well as synergies among all 4 categories of stakeholders inside as well as outside of the Arctic Council.

Questions about funding for Permanent Participants’ participation and contribution was raised on a couple of occasions, as was the issue of the need for further capacity building versus sustaining efforts to incorporate traditional knowledge in activities of the Arctic Council.

Deputy ministers, state secretaries, and other delegates of the 8 Arctic States met with representatives of the Permanent Participants and the observers at an unprecedented Deputy Ministerial meeting on 27 May 2010.

The topic for the meeting was “Responding to emerging challenges in the Arctic” and Deputy Ministers were to discuss the leadership role of the Arctic Council. Thereafter, the meeting focused on the issues of Search and Rescue, Short-Lived Climate Forcers, and Sustaining Arctic Observation Networks, i.e., three areas on which the Arctic Council is expected to present significant results at the Ministerial Meeting in 2011.

Mandated by Ministers in the Tromsoe Ministerial declaration, the Deputy Ministers' meeting was conceived in response to a desire for more frequent political engagement within the overall framework of the Ministerial mandate for the Arctic Council.

The first session of the day consisted of a tour de table during which deputy ministers, permanent participants, and observers raised topics they considered most crucial to the future work of the Arctic Council.

Consensus among the national representatives centered round the need to reinforce the science based decision shaping role of the Arctic Council, while at the same time preserving the unique permanent participant role of indigenous people within the council and determining an appropriate role for the observers.

Among other things, the Danish/Greenlandic/Faroese delegate Inuuteq Holm Olsen noted that indigenous peoples and other people of the Arctic want development and sustainability, i.e., exactly the core purposes of the council. On the area of sustainable development, the delegate suggested, the council should develop into being more of a decision-making instrument rather than merely a decision-shaping one.

All delegation spokespersons stressed the need for strengthening the Arctic Council. Russian delegate, Ambassador at large Anton Vasiliev, remarked that rather than looking upon the Arctic Sea coastal states meetings (A5) as weakening of the role of the Arctic Council, A5 meetings had actually resulted in growing support for the Arctic Council as the main forum for Arctic policy discussions.

ICC Chair James Stotts said that permanent participants felt that their place at the table was not secure and that they were in danger of being squeezed out. To the ICC, the need seemed not so much for a reform of the Arctic Council as to regroup and refocus on the true virtues of the Arctic Council with fair and equitable solutions reached by member states and permanent participants and no one else.