351. Memorandum From the Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs (Wallis) to Secretary of State Shultz1

SUBJECT

  • Request for Circular 175 Authority to Sign the Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer

As the memo from Malone on this subject points out, I oppose the draft protocol on reductions of emissions of CFC’s.2 I am also opposed to the basic Convention. Although it might seem to provide only for [Page 1003] research, and thus be harmless, even in research it would do more harm than good. It also is expressly intended to provide an umbrella for international regulation, such as that in the draft protocol.

In the past our research on environmental matters has been conducted in parallel in different countries, without vesting it in an international organization. Experience shows that it is wise to do things that way. In the particular case of CFC’s, European scientists and environmental authorities have shown a healthy skepticism toward U.S. activism, and have correctly pointed out the major gaps in existing knowledge. The proposed Convention would set up an international scientific “authority” that would tend to override and suppress the healthy cross-checking by scientists in different countries. Furthermore, officials in our regulatory agencies have seen international regulation as a way to circumvent and override U.S. policy, which aims toward deregulation in many areas. These tendencies should be curbed, not encouraged.

Therefore I think that it was a mistake to authorize the negotiations toward this Convention in the first place. Although things are now at an advanced stage, we have already shown our willingness to pull back (as in the “Law of the Sea” case, among others) when a closer look shows that an international treaty or other policy is fundamentally flawed.3

Recommendation:

That you disapprove the proposed authority to sign the Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer.

Allen Wallis4
  1. Source: Department of State, Chronological Files, 1984–1985, Lot 86D362, March #2 [2] 1985 Completed Items. No classification marking. In a March 20 memorandum to Schneider, Marshall forwarded Wallis’ memorandum and stated: “We had thought the matter had been cleared with Under Secretary Wallis’ office. Apart from what we believe to be clear errors on the merits, there is also the downside of being isolated in not signing this Convention at this time and, of course, the personal embarrassment of leaving Jim high and dry in Vienna.” (Ibid.)
  2. Document 350.
  3. After this sentence, an unknown hand drew an asterisk that corresponds to a handwritten notation at the bottom of the memorandum, which reads: “What is proposed here is, or may appear to be, inconsistent with our stance with Canada or acid rain.”
  4. Wallis signed a “W” above his typed signature.