The next session of the Conference will be held in Geneva from March 17
to May 10. The Under Secretaries Committee is currently reviewing
proposed changes in the instructions to the US Delegation and will be forwarding recommendations to you
in the near future.
Attachment
Report Prepared by the Special Representative of
the President for the Law of the Sea Conference (Stevenson) and the Deputy Special
Representative (Moore)
Washington, undated
Subject:
- Report on the Caracas Session of the Third United Nations
Conference on the Law of the Sea
Background:
The United States has the largest and most varied stake in the oceans
of any nation. Important United States oceans interests include
protection of navigational freedom for military and commercial
vessels and aircraft, protection of our coastal fish stocks and the
salmon which spawn in our streams, exclusive rights to the mineral
resources, including the hydrocarbons, of the U.S. continental margin, continued access to highly
migratory species such as tuna, access to the mineral resources of
the deep seabed under reasonable terms for development to occur,
protection of the oceans environment, protection of marine
scientific research, and a strong political interest in resolving
bilateral oceans disputes and in promoting a stable legal order for
the oceans. Because of the range and complexity of these U.S. oceans interests, a comprehensive
oceans treaty provides the best means of protecting them.
Following five years of preparatory work within the United Nations,
in 1973 the General Assembly formally convened the Third United
Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and charged it with
developing a comprehensive oceans treaty. A two week organizational
session was held in New York during December of 1973 and a ten week
substantive session was held in Caracas last summer from June 20 to
August 29. The [Page 3] next
substantive session of the Conference will be held in Geneva from
March 17 to May 10 of this year.
Achievements of the Caracas Session:
Although the Caracas session did not produce a treaty or agreed
articles in any area, significant progress was made toward a
comprehensive treaty. This progress includes:
- —the Conference agreed on rules of procedure, including
voting rules, which provide safeguards against premature
voting or steamroller tactics;
- —the transition from the U.N. Seabed Committee of 90 states to a
Conference of over 140 was achieved without major new
stumbling blocks and with a minimum delay;
- —the inclusion in the treaty of a 12-mile territorial sea
and a 200-mile economic zone was supported by over 100
countries, subject to acceptable resolution of other issues,
including unimpeded transit of straits. Accordingly, broad
jurisdiction over our coastal fish stocks and the
hydrocarbons of our margin appears virtually assured;
- —there is general agreement on freedom of navigation and
overflight in the economic zone;
- —there is general agreement that there will be a new
international organization for the mineral resources of the
deep seabed and a beginning was made in negotiation of the
essential elements of this new organization;
- —the vast array of law of the sea issues and proposals
within the mandate of Committee II was organized into a
comprehensive set of [Page 4]
Working Papers reflecting main trends on each precise
issue;
- —extensive Committee work sharpened the issues and
narrowed the differences throughout a broad range of issues
including protection of the marine environment, marine
scientific research, and dispute settlement
machinery.
Problems and Prospects:
After Caracas there is general agreement on the overall outlines of a
comprehensive oceans treaty. Progress, however, has been slow and
there is a broad range of important issues yet to be resolved. These
include:
- —guarantees for unimpeded transit through, over and under
straits used for international navigation;
- —the archipelago principle by which mid-ocean island
states would draw archipelagic closing lines connecting
their outermost islands and enclosing the waters within
subject to transit guarantees through such waters;
- —treatment of traditional fishing for coastal species of
fish;
- —special treatment for tuna (highly migratory species),
and salmon (anadromous species);
- —rights to mineral resources of the continental margin
when such margins extend beyond 200 miles (the US has only from 1 to 7% of its
potential margin hydrocarbons beyond 200 miles);
- —jurisdiction to set and enforce standards for protection
of the marine environment, particularly jurisdiction with
respect to the important vessel-source pollution
issue;
- —rights and duties concerning marine scientific
research;
- —the structure and functions of the new organization for
the resources of the seabed in areas beyond national
jurisdiction (the deep seabed);
- —the nature and scope of machinery for the settlement of
disputes arising under the treaty.
The most important of these unresolved issues are (a) the regime of
straits and archipelagos and (b) the structure and functions of the
new organization for the mineral resources of the deep seabeds.
For the first time at Caracas, more states spoke in favor of
unimpeded transit of straits (the U.S. position) than spoke in favor of innocent passage.
Taken together with the progress in our efforts to reach an
accommodation with archipelagic states such as Indonesia and the
Bahamas, there has been a strengthening of our position on straits.
Nevertheless, some straits states such as Spain have been active in
opposition to our straits objectives, particularly with respect to
military transit of straits, submerged transit, and overflight. We
are hopeful that the favorable trend begun in Caracas will continue
as the resource elements, which are of greater importance to most
developing countries, are resolved.
The most difficult issue remaining in the negotiation is the
structure and functions of the new organization for deep seabed
mining. The United States seeks guaranteed access to the mineral
resources of the deep seabed on reasonable terms to promote
development.
As such we have proposed legal arrangements which would minimize the
discretion of the new international authority, which would protect
the integrity of investments made in deep seabed mining, and which
would ensure a balanced decision-making structure to protect the
interests of deep seabed mining states and minerals consumers. Many
developing countries seek a strong [Page 6] enterprise which would directly engage in
mining of deep seabed mineral resources and which would be empowered
to regulate prices and production for the protection of existing
land-based producers of deep seabed minerals (largely copper,
nickel, manganese and cobalt contained in manganese nodules).
Willingness of both sides to work out a reasonable solution
protecting the interests of all states is of crucial importance to
further progress in the negotiations.
During the course of the law of the sea negotiations the United
States has stressed the importance of all nations holding off on new
unilateral claims in the oceans. It is of particular importance that
the United States set an example for others by not passing the
legislation pending in Congress which would unilaterally extend the
U.S. fisheries contiguous zone
from the present 12 miles to 200 miles. Our fishing as well as our
other important oceans interests will be far better served by
continuing to vigorously pursue a comprehensive oceans treaty.
John R. Stevenson
Special Representative of the President for the Law of the
Sea Conference
John Norton Moore
Deputy Special Representative of the President for the Law
of the Sea Conference and Chairman, the NSC Interagency Task Force on the Law of the
Sea
