Foreign Relations of the United States, 1981–1988, Volume XLI, Global Issues II

116. Letter From Secretary of the Interior Watt to Secretary of State Haig ¹

Washington, February 18, 1981

Dear Mr. Haig:

As you know, one of President Reagan’s top initiatives is the enhancement and assurance of United States access to strategic and critical minerals.² Your own knowledge and expertise in the field is recognized particularly in light of your recent testimony before the House of Representatives Mines and Mining Subcommittee on “Resource War: Minerals Held Hostage.”³ As I have expressed to you, I share your deep concern.

In the international sphere, one of the most potentially devastating threats to secure access to strategic minerals is the present status of the Law of the Sea Treaty negotiations. It is my firm conviction, based on information brought to my attention by Members of Congress, as well as representatives of academia, industry and labor, that if the existing negotiating text is not markedly changed, the U.S. deep seabed mining industry will collapse for want of a secure investment climate. Given the hundreds of millions of dollars involved in these projects such a climate is critical.

While I have serious reservations regarding much of the current draft convention text, including technology transfer, production limitations and site selection, I am most immediately concerned with the apparent disregard, by the U.S. delegation, of the grandfather instructions adopted by the Congress and the reciprocating State negotiations.⁴ I would urge you to order an immediate review of the orientation of the U.S. delegation.

If I may be of assistance in this important endeavor, it would be my great pleasure to provide whatever technical expertise would be of aid to you.⁵

Sincerely,

James Watt

1. Source: Department of State, Law of the Sea—Third UN Conference, 1968–1983, Lot 85D357, LOS—Deep Seabed Mining 1981. No classification marking.
2. See Robert D. Hershey, “U.S. Weighs Subsidizing of Strategic Minerals,” New York Times, June 13, 1981.
3. In a September 1980 meeting before the Mines and Mining Subcommittee of the House Committee on the Interior, Haig stated that “the Soviet Union may gain control of as much as 70 percent of the world’s supply of critical minerals for which there is no substitute.” (Kevin P. Phillips, “Crisis in Strategic Minerals,” Sarasota Herald-Tribune, November 17, 1980, p. 4)
4. Documents regarding the grandfather instructions and the reciprocating state negotiations are scheduled for publication in Foreign Relations, 1977–1980, vol. XXV, Global Issues; United Nations Issues.
5. In a March 30 letter to Watt, Haig wrote, “Our Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act encourages us to negotiate provisions which will give our seabed miners assured and nondiscriminatory access to minerals and security of tenure if they have begun exploration or commercial recovery under the Act. The policy review we have undertaken will determine how best to meet these objectives. Consultations with like-minded states of Western Europe and Japan were initiated last summer and shall continue with a view toward establishing an interim reciprocating states regime, as foreseen in the Act, pending the successful conclusion of a Law of the Sea Treaty.” (Department of State, Assistant Secretary Files—Elliott Abrams Subject and CHRON Files, 1981–1987, Lot 89D184, Law of the Sea)