Current (2024) members are: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Republic of the Congo, Costa Rica, Ivory Coast, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark (which also acts as the Kingdom with the Faroe Islands and Greenland), Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, the Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Grenada, Republic of Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kenya, South Korea, Kiribati, Laos, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mali, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Palau, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, São Tomé and Príncipe, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, Togo, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, United States, and Uruguay.

These countries called for the IWC to reform its policies and to incorporate newly discovered scientific data regarding whales in its proposed regulations.

The relevant text reads: Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10, catch limits for the killing for commercial purposes of whales from all stocks for the 1986 coastal and the 1985/86 pelagic seasons and thereafter shall be zero.

[40] Japan, Norway, Peru, and the Soviet Union (later replaced by Russia) lodged formal objections, since the moratorium was not based on advice from the Scientific Committee.

On 13 September 2018, IWC members gathered in Florianópolis, Brazil, where they discussed and rejected a proposal by Japan to renew commercial whaling.

[54] The BBC also reports that "[c]onservationists argue that the IWC should be devoting far more of its attention to issues such as whales being hit by ships, the effects of pollution and climate change, and the pressures that drive species such as the baiji (or Yangtse river dolphin) to extinction.

After the moratorium came into force in 1986, the Scientific Committee was commissioned to review the status of the whale stocks and develop a calculation method for setting safe catch limits.

At the IWC's annual meeting in 1991, the Scientific Committee submitted its finding that there existed approximately 761,000 minke whales in Antarctic waters, 87,000 in the northeast Atlantic, and 25,000 in the North Pacific.

Despite this, the IWC Plenary Committee voted to maintain the blanket moratorium on whaling, arguing that formulas for determining allowable catches had not yet been adequately evaluated.

In 1991, acting on the recommendation of the Scientific Committee, the IWC adopted a computerized formula, the Revised Management Procedure (RMP), for determining allowable catches of some whale species.

The IWC noted the need to agree on minimum standards for data, to prepare guidelines on the conduct of population surveys, and to devise and approve a system of measures for monitoring and inspection.

[citation needed] Ray Gambell, then the Secretary of the IWC, agreed at least in part with the argument of the pro-whaling countries: "In all reasonableness, we would have to say that a commercial catch could be taken without endangering [Minke] stocks.

The purpose of the IWC as specified in its constitution is "in safeguarding for future generations the great natural resources represented by the whale stocks;" and the original members consisted only of the 15 whale-hunting countries.

"[61] Since the moratorium was adopted, the support for it has dropped from a 75% majority to a 50–50 split, with many of the countries initially recruited by the anti-whaling side now voting with the pro-whaling block.

Japan has given US$320 million in overseas aid to Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Guinea, Morocco, Panama, St. Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, St Kitts and Nevis and the Solomon Islands.

The BBC reported that "Some countries recently admitted to the European Union have been advised by a "word in the ear" that it would be "a good idea" for them to join the IWC.

"[66] In Australia, National Nine News reported that "New Zealand is questioning pro-whaling support among Pacific Island states with the opposition calling for a rethink of foreign aid.

[68] Moreover, coastal countries have a vested interest in conserving their fish stocks which may be threatened by whales (this claim is strongly contested by the anti-whaling lobby).

The Japanese argue that the African countries and whaling countries have a shared interest in preventing the principle of sustainable management being exploited as a cover for animal rights arguments: Owing to the economic power of the US and the UK, CITES was forced to list perfectly healthy species of whales (over the objections of its secretariat), along with legitimately endangered species, on its banned list.

In an interview reported in The Observer newspaper in May 2001, Atherton Martin, Dominica's former Environment and Fisheries Minister who publicly opposes whaling,[70] said: They [Japan] make it clear, that if you don't vote for them, they will have to reconsider the aid.

Lester Bird, prime minister of Antigua and Barbuda, had said: So as long as the whales are not an endangered species, I don't see any reason why if we are able to support the Japanese and the quid pro quo is that they will give us some assistance.

[71]In an interview with Australian ABC television in July 2001, Japanese Fisheries Agency official Maseyuku Komatsu described minke whales as "cockroaches of the sea".

The Sydney Morning Herald reported that he further stated "lacking military might, his country had to use the tools of diplomacy and promises of development aid to "get appreciation of Japan's position" on whaling.

"Would these rich nations give a poor fisherman a revolving loan or a grant or a gift so that he can buy [a tourist boat] to go whale watching?

From Japan's point of view, secret ballot voting would also reduce the powerful collective influence of the anti-whaling lobby on IWC members.

Anti-whaling governments oppose secret ballot voting on the grounds that it is without precedent in other international bodies and that it would remove accountability and make behind-the-scenes deals between delegations more likely.

The pro-whaling countries often see the U.S.'s propensity to act outside the IWC framework as "bullying" tactics, while environmentalists and the conservation lobby tend to applaud the U.S.'s approach.

[80] The threatened application in 1980 of the Packwood-Magnuson and Pelly Amendments led South Korea to agree to follow IWC guidelines restricting the use of cold (i.e. non-explosive) harpoons.

Without United States support, it is possible that the 1986 moratorium would have been substantially limited, as countries such as Iceland, Japan, Norway and the Soviet Union would have opted out and continued commercial whaling.

Guðmundur Eiríksson of Iceland stated at NAMMCO's inaugural meeting that the organisation was established in part out of dissatisfaction with the IWC's zero-catch quota.