331. Memorandum From the Director of the Office of Inter-American Regional Political Affairs (Dreier) to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Snow)1

SUBJECT

  • UN Law of the Sea Conference

The Latin American area presents some of the more serious problems for the U.S. Delegation to the Law of the Sea Conference, and ARA has followed closely developments in connection with preparations for the Conference. Earl H. Luboeansky has been assigned the task of following ARA’s interest in the Conference. He cooperates with Mr. William Sanders, who will be the Assistant Chairman of the U.S. Delegation, and has taken care of coordination in ARA of all instructions regarding consultations by our Embassies with Latin American Governments. The question of ARA representation at the Conference itself has not yet been settled as some last minute problems have arisen in this respect, but we are actively working on them.

Consideration has been given, and appropriate action has as far as possible been taken, to win support among Latin American countries for the U.S. position for a three-mile territorial sea and for the U.S. concept on the fisheries problem. The Department has been successful in the past months in favorably influencing Latin American governments [Page 645] in some matters pertaining to the Law of the Sea. The Dominican Republic, which claims three miles territorial sea, has decided after reconsideration to send a delegate to the Conference though the invitation had already been declined. The Honduran Government has accepted flexible provisions in its draft constitution in the sections pertaining to territorial waters. President Somoza of Nicaragua has deferred until after the Conference presentation of a bill to Congress which would claim the waters over the continental shelf. The landlocked countries (Bolivia and Paraguay) are adopting policies in favor of the three-mile limit.

We are now prepared to go along with the Canadian proposal for nine additional contiguous miles for exclusive fishing jurisdiction for coastal states. The question is still pending at Under Secretary level whether the U.S. may start immediately to campaign for the contiguous zone concept or whether a determination must first be made at the Conference that a majority will support that formula. It would be preferable in our effort to win support among Latin American countries for us to indicate immediately that we will have a conciliatory negotiating position in regard to the economic needs of coastal states in off-shore fishing.

We could not expect to garner support for a nine-mile contiguous zone among the 200-mile claimants (Chile, Ecuador, Peru, El Salvador, and Costa Rica). There are indications, however, of softening in the positions of some of these countries toward a three-mile territorial sea and a broad contiguous zone for exclusive fishing rights (perhaps less than 200 miles). An early approach on the contiguous zone concept might be expected to result in a favorable reaction among many of the other countries in Latin America and in conciliatory positions on their part. By demonstrating that we are aware of the economic needs of coastal states we should in turn expect a greater readiness on the part of others to go along with our security arguments favoring the three-mile limit.

I have discussed our general situation in Latin America, vis-à-vis the Law of the Sea Conference, with Mr. Sanders who feels things are in about as good shape as can be expected and that we are doing what is necessary to strengthen our position where possible. I have assured him of our desire to be of all possible assistance.

  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 399.731/2–1158. Confidential. Drafted and initialed by Luboeansky and initialed by Dreier.