For this assignment I have chosen the "an exemption for whaling" as it is my very old concern about the cultural difference specially when i have faced to a documentary movie about whaling in Japan which shows a red sea from a whale blood and this documentary explained that in some areas this is the only way for a large group of people to survive, so suddenly this question popped up in my mind that which one has priority, a whale life or humans life quality.One the aspects which upset me most is that many people from developed countries which never experienced living in a undeveloped area or country have other priorities or at least concern than a person or family who straggles whit extreme poverty and hunger but during the globalization and some main streams they dictate their mind which is affected by medias and their life style.
Do you agree with the Norwegian and Japanese position on
…show more content…
I don't think that whaling ban constitutes a violation of these nations' sovereignty as this whales are the share property of the all nations but I do believe that whaling ban constitutes a violation of human rights as having enough food to eat and a job to feed your family is one the basic rights.
How should these kinds of questions about cultural exemptions be settled? Should an international panel (such as a committee at the WTO) be asked to weigh the validity of such claims? Who should serve on such a panel?
I think a committee consists of specialists , scientist , economist, cultural expertise with enough executive power could take this responsibility as I do believe that its a anthropology and geographic matter which normally politicians are so interested on! and they tries to take political advantages of it, so I think any professional committee without governors or politicians could decide not only about this questions but about the alternative methods in case of