IT IS not often that the Marshall Islands, a scattering of coral outcrops in the North Pacific, find themselves at the fulcrum of history.

The last time was 60 years ago, when Bikini Atoll became the site of atomic bomb tests; since then the 60,000 Marshallese have lived in quiet obscurity. But tomorrow they will make a decision that will have implications across the world, and deep into its seas.

The question under consideration by members of the Marshall Islands parliament, the Nitijela, is straightforward enough: how to cast their vote in the five-day meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), which begins the following day. The Marshall Islands is one of the newest of the IWC’s 70 members, but its debut at the meeting is momentous.

According to environmental campaigners, it could help to seal the fate of the planet’s biggest mammals.

If the Marshall Islands votes with anti-whaling countries — including Britain, the United States and Australia — control of the IWC could remain in their hands and the 20-year-old ban on commercial whaling will remain secure. But if they vote with the pro-whaling bloc, led by Japan, the single Marshallese vote could tip the balance — for the first time since 1984, supporters of whaling would have a majority on the IWC.

The result would be a crushing blow to environmentalists and a step towards the resumption of large-scale whaling. “We can’t be sure how the final vote will go, but it’s on a knife edge and a single vote could make the difference,” said Mike Townsley, of Greenpeace. “The Marshall Islands are famous for being blown into oblivion by nuclear tests. Ironically, they could go down in history now as one of the countries who sealed the fate of the whale.”

With two days to go before the opening of the meeting, both sides agree that supporters of whaling seem to have the upper hand.

Barring an unexpected reversal, the conservationist nations will lose their majority for the first time since 1984 — a triumph for Japan, and the culmination of a long and determined campaign of lobbying, diplomatic and economic pressure and, according to environmental campaigners, outright bribery.

The Japanese believe they have secured the votes of 36 of the IWC’s 70 members, including the Marshall Islands. This will not result in any immediate lifting of the ban on commercial whaling, which requires a three-quarters majority. But it will allow Japan to ram through procedural changes that will make that goal more attainable.

Japan has already tabled a motion to introduce secret ballots — a ploy, environmentalists say, to spare the embarrassment of governments that have obviously been bought off by Tokyo. It is also likely to deprive campaign groups such as Greenpeace and the WWF of their observer status, and to pass a resolution recognising the loophole by which Japan kills hundreds of whales every year in the name of scientific research.

For all the serenity of the creatures, whale politics is a ruthless business, fuelled by nationalism, prejudice and greed. Previous IWC meetings have seen walkouts, allegations of dirty tricks, and ill-disguised bitterness between the pro and anti-whaling factions. This year’s gathering — hosted by the small Caribbean nation of St Kitts and Nevis — promises to be even nastier than usual. At the centre of the conflict is the future of the 20-year-old whaling ban.

To the pro-whaling members of the commission, which include Iceland, Norway and Russia, as well as Japan, the moratorium long ago served its purpose — to arrest the perilous decline in whale numbers. Many species, it is argued, have reached safe levels. A 1990 survey suggested that in the Antarctic there were 761,000 of the small minke whales, for example. Whale meat, it is pointed out, has formed part of the Japanese diet for hundreds of years; if the creatures are not endangered, foreigners have no more right to object to their consumption than Japanese would have to demand a ban on beef.

“Japan’s objective is to resume commercial whaling for abundant species on a sustainable basis under international control,” said Joji Morishita, of the Japanese Fisheries Agency. “At the same time we are committed to conservation and the protection of endangered species.”

Moderate opponents of whaling, including many Japanese environmentalists, agree that whales are a legitimate maritime resource, but are sceptical about the 16-year-old figures on which the Japanese position is based. Whales are difficult to count, and they breed slowly. Further research must be carried out, it is argued, before there can be certainty about the recovery of whale populations.

But until recently most members of the commission, including Britain, opposed commercial whaling under any circumstances for the pain it inflicts and the damage caused to biodiversity. Rather than countering the claims, Japan is accused of engineering a transformation in the make-up of the IWC.

In the past eight years, 21 new members have joined the commission and voted in support of Japan. Many of them, such as the Marshall Islands, Palau and Surinam, are tiny, poor countries with no history of whaling. Two of them, Mali and Mongolia, are landlocked. Most receive Japanese aid. Japan indignantly denies that it pays its supporters in the IWC.

“Accusations that their votes have been bought are an insult to the sovereignty of these nations to vote as they wish within the IWC,” said Mr Morishita. But over the years plenty of evidence suggests that Japan uses money to increase support for its position.

In 1980, the Japanese ambassador wrote to the Government of the Seychelles, refusing a fisheries grant unless it stopped supporting whale sanctuaries in the IWC. The former IWC commissioner for the Solomon Islands, Albert Wata, admitted in 2001 that Japan paid his government’s membership fees.

In 2000, the former fisheries minister of Dominica, Atherton Martin, recounted the “extortionary tactics” which, he said, had won over five Caribbean countries in the IWC. “They announced that if they couldn’t get Dominica to come along with them, they would have to place Dominican projects under reviews,” he said. At last year’s meeting, Japan narrowly lost after three supporters failed to turn up.

“Some of you are so glad that some poor countries could not attend this meeting,” a Japanese official, Akira Nakamae, said. “However, next year they will all participate. The reversal of history, the turning point, is soon to come.”

Times Recommends

• Michael Jackson: Not the final chapter
• Indian Army spends10m rupees on golf buggies
• Sacha Baron Cohen forced to tone down Brüno