The government of Iceland returned fire today at President Obama, who issued an executive order telling federal agencies to pressure the North Atlantic nation over its whaling industry.

Obama's move -- aimed at forcing Iceland to stop whaling for export to Japan -- is based on inaccurate information, officials in Reykjavik said. Iceland insists its whaling is lawful and sustainable and that it won't be swayed by U.S. disapproval.

Reykjavik also accused the United States of hypocrisy, saying Iceland's fin and minke whale quotas are similar to quotas the United States sets for the annual bowhead whale hunt by Alaska Natives. Both whale hunts are sustainable, Iceland authorities say.

Citing a Commerce Department study that determined Iceland's whaling practices were undermining the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and threatening the existence of Atlantic fin whales, Obama yesterday ordered federal agencies to isolate and punish Iceland diplomatically until it ceases whaling operations (E&ENews PM, Sept. 16).

In a letter to Congress, Obama said he had ordered his Cabinet to apply diplomatic pressure on Iceland over the issue and seek other ways to express the U.S. government's displeasure. Sanctions could include officials' turning down invitations to travel to Iceland, refusing to meet with Icelandic officials and even tying the whaling dispute to other areas of possible cooperation between the two nations -- everything short of financial or trade sanctions.

But Icelandic officials say the United States, not Iceland, is in contravention of IWC rules and scientific consensus.

Iceland continues to claim an exemption from the nearly 30-year-old whaling moratorium.

Instead, authorities in Reykjavik insist that when they rejoined the IWC, they made it clear that they did not agree with the international ban on whaling and would not abide by it. They call this a "lawful reservation" that made them legally exempt, the nation's Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture said in a point-by-point rebuttal to Obama's declaration.

Obama states in his letter to Congress that Iceland began a "lethal scientific research whaling program" in 2003, one year after rejoining the whaling commission.

Such whaling programs are highly controversial and seen by activists and anti-whaling governments alike as illicit commercial whaling. Japan is widely seen as using its official research whaling program as a cover for commercial operations, taking advantage of a loophole in IWC rules.

But in an email, Tomas Heidar, Iceland's commissioner to the IWC, says his nation ended that program in 2007 and has been conducting open and honest commercial kills since 2006.

Heidar and Iceland's fisheries and agriculture ministry also say Obama's decision is based on bad math and that there is nothing alarming about the increase in numbers of whales killed in recent years.

The United States sees the rising number of whales killed by Iceland as an attempt "to revitalize an industry and re-energize a commercial whale market," the United States' IWC commissioner, Monica Medina, said.

Numbers

The U.S. government says Iceland killed seven endangered fin whales between 1987 to 2007, then suddenly took 125 whales in 2009 and 148 in 2010. The uptick in fin whale hunting also exceeds levels deemed safe by IWC scientists.

In response, Iceland's fisheries and agriculture minister says that, in fact, the real number is 216 total fin whales killed over the 1987-2007 period, and not seven.

The Obama administration's contention that only seven fin whales were killed over that time period "ignores the fact that 80 fin whales were caught in 1987, 68 were caught in 1988 and 68 were caught in 1989," the ministry said in a point-by-point rebuttal of Obama's declaration.

Heidar also insists the fin whale hunt is sustainable. The North Atlantic fin whale population is healthy and thriving, he said, even though the South Atlantic stock is in trouble. Trying to tie the two stocks together to declare the whole species is endangered is akin to claiming that Canadian and Norwegian cod stocks were the same, he said.

He also voiced frustration at the fact that the United States is leveling these accusations at his country while simultaneously pushing for approval of whaling by Alaska Natives in the United States.

"When we compare the Icelandic fin whale quota and the U.S. bowhead quota in proportion to stock size, we find that the quotas are very similar," Heidar said. "Both whaling activities are sustainable. The U.S. therefore [shows a] double standard when they criticize the Icelandic fin whale hunting but ask for our support for their bowhead hunting within the IWC."

For her part, Medina dismissed the link in an interview yesterday. Alaska whaling is for sustenance by isolated communities, she said, while Iceland's activities are strictly for the pursuit of profit and exports to Japan.