Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, Europe: Political and Economic Developments, Volume IV, Part 1

No. 222

740B.022/6–2151: Despatch

The Minister in Iceland (Lawson) to the Secretary of State

confidential
No. 557

Reykjavik, June 21, 1951.

Ref:

Legation Despatch 151, April 28, 1950

Dept. Instruction No. 13, May 22, 1950¹

Subject: Presentation of U.S. note to Iceland regarding extension of territorial waters

After reviewing the present situation, it is recommended that no action be taken with regard to the presentation of a note to the Icelandic Government protesting its extension of its territorial waters.² This opinion is based on the assumption that the presentation of such a note at this time would be politically inadvisable for several reasons.

In the first place, the elapsed time between the signing of the United States-Icelandic Defense Agreement has been too short to justify another test of Icelandic temper. Furthermore, the numerous initial problems arising in connection with the implementation of that Agreement have not created an atmosphere which is favorable to the presentation of the note which would raise considerable ill feeling. The public attitude toward the presence of United States troops is in the process of formation, and it is hoped that without any disturbing influence it will be one of acceptance rather than animosity. In this connection, it should be noted that the agreement to receive foreign troops during peacetime represents a very definite departure from the past policy of the Icelandic Government and an entirely new experience for the Icelandic public.

It has also been noted that there is a very strong and growing feeling among the powerful fishing interests in Iceland that there should be no delay in declaring the new extended territorial waters limit effective insofar as British trawlers are concerned. This powerful group is exerting considerable pressure on the Government to take action at the earliest possible moment to prohibit those vessels from operating within the new limits.

Furthermore, the Foreign Minister informed me today that there is a possibility that, despite this heavy pressure, Iceland may postpone its formal declaration of the new territorial limits as they affect the British. This declaration normally would take place on or before October 3, 1951.³ He is in favor of such a delay and has so stated in the Althing. He feels that the formal declaration should not precede the publication of the Hague Court’s decision on the U.K.–Norway case, but he is not sure of the support of his colleagues. It seems logical that in view of the present status of the Foreign Minister’s thinking and the possible decision of the government to postpone the declaration no distracting action should be taken by us at this time. The timing would seem to be particularly unfavorable in view of the fact that the next meeting of the Althing is scheduled for early October which coincides with the normal declaration date. And the Foreign Minister has pointed out that, despite his government’s intention of postponement, the Althing may order the declaration. It would seem, therefore, that should we present our note prior to October 3, the reaction of the Althing might well be that of insisting on the declaration without delay.

Therefore, it would appear that tactically it would be bad from our viewpoint and politically it would be unwise. We seem to stand to lose more than we stand to gain if we take action prior to the Hague Court decision.

The subject of the U.K. position has been discussed informally with the British Minister who informed me that he had sent a note to the Foreign Office last month expressing the hope that the Icelandic Government would refrain from imposing its new regulations and that nothing be done until the conclusion of the present proceedings at the Hague. The British Minister informed me that he expected from the Foreign Minister no reply to that note. He referred to the fact that the British Fisheries Patrol ship was due to arrive in Iceland early in October, but he was hopeful that there would be no “incidents” between October 3 and the Hague Court decision’s date. He emphasized the fact that the British fishing interests were very powerful and were bringing strong pressure on his government. There is enclosed a copy of the British Legation’s note to the Icelandic Foreign Office on the above subject dated May 23, 1951.⁴ I did not reveal to the British Minister that I was inquiring in connection with possible presentation of our note to the Icelandic Government.⁵

Edward B. Lawson

1. Neither printed.

2. In April 1950 the Icelandic Government publicly announced new regulations prohibiting foreign vessels from fishing inside an area 4 nautical miles from the northern coast of Iceland. The only countries excepted were those whose treaty rights with Iceland allowed them to operate under the existing 3-mile limit.

   Instruction 13 to Reykjavik, May 22, 1950, directed the U.S. Minister in Iceland to formally protest the new Icelandic regulations. (740B.022/5–2250) In telegram 85 and despatch 205 from Reykjavik, June 1, 1950, the U.S. Minister informed the Department of State that he had delivered the American protest but had then suspended it temporarily at the request of the Icelandic Foreign Minister. The Department of State agreed to a delay in the delivery of the note. (740B.022/5–2350 and 740B.022/6–150)

3. October 3 was the date on which Iceland’s notice of termination of the Anglo-Danish Fisheries Convention of 1901 was to take effect. Until that date the British had the privilege, by treaty, of fishing to the 3-mile limit. The British hoped Iceland would refrain from applying the new fishing regulations to them until the International Court of Justice at The Hague ruled on a British challenge to the right of Norway to establish a 4-mile limit for fishing around its coast.

   Despatch 176, from London, July 11, 1950, contains a copy of the instructions the Foreign Office sent to the British Minister in Iceland on the subject of the Icelandic regulations. The British Minister in Iceland had delivered a formal protest to the Icelandic Government in July 1950. Correspondence and memoranda of conversations between the British and U.S. officials are in file 740B.022.

4. The British note expressed the hope that the new regulations would not be applied to the British before British and Icelandic officials had discussed the matter in the light of the judgment of The Hague Court. The Judgment was not expected to be handed down until January 1952 at the earliest. (740B.022/5–2351)
5. Airgram A–9 to Reykjavik, August 2, instructed the U.S. Legation to deliver the note at that time, if it had no objection. On August 15 the U.S. Minister delivered the note of protest but again withdrew it at the request of Iceland and recommended further delay. (740B.022/8–251)