265270

JPRS 81416

2 August 1982

^vflT

litKws*»1

Worldwide Report

LAW OF THE SEA

No. 204

OJ

FOREIGN BROADCAST INFORMATION SERVICE

CD

A & s
NOTE

JPRS publications contain information primarily from foreign

newspapers, periodicals and books, but also from news agency

transmissions and broadcasts. Materials from foreign-language

sources are translated; those from English-language sources

are transcribed or reprinted, with the original phrasing and

other characteristics retained.

Headlines, editorial reports, and material enclosed in brackets

[] are supplied by JPRS. Processing indicators such as [Text]

or [Excerpt] in the first line of each item, or following the

last line of a brief, indicate how the original information was

processed. Where no processing indicator is given, the information was summarized or extracted.

Unfamiliar names rendered phonetically or transliterated are

enclosed in parentheses. Words or names preceded by a question mark and enclosed in parentheses were not clear in the

original but have been supplied as appropriate in context.

Other unattributed parenthetical notes within the body of an

item originate with the source. Times within items are as

given by source.

The contents of this publication in no way represent the policies, views or attitudes of the U.S. Government.

PROCUREMENT OF PUBLICATIONS

JPRS publications may be ordered from the National Technical

Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161. In ordering, it is recommended that the JPRS number, title, date and

author, if applicable, of publication be cited.

Current JPRS publications are announced in Government Reports

Announcements issued semi-monthly by the National Technical

Information Service, and are listed in the Monthly Catalog of

U.S. Government Publications issued by the Superintendent of

Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

20402.

Correspondence pertaining to matters other than procurement

may be addressed to Joint Publications Research Service,

1000 North Glebe Road, Arlington, Virginia 22201.
TO:RS 81416

2 August 1982

WORLDWIDE REPORT

LAW OF THE SEA

No. 204

CONTENTS

WORLDWIDE AFFAIRS

Levchenko on U.S. Refusal To Sign Sea Law

(TASS International Service, 10 Jul 82),

USSR Accepts Only Half New Zealand Finfish Quota

(THE PRESS, 26 May 82), 2

ASIA

INTER-ASIAN AFFAIRS

INDIA

Japan Awaits DPRK Moves on Fishery Accord

(KYODO, 29 Jun 82) 3

India's Search for Ocean Resources Described

(THE HINDU, 18 Jun 82, THE TIMES OF INDIA, 19 Jun 82) 4

Mining, Other Possibilities, by B. S. Padmanabhan

Oceanographic Vessel Described

Significance of Development of Seabed Noted

(S. Sahay; THE STATESMAN, 24 Jun 82) 9

Vice President Opens Deep-Sea Fishing Parley

(PATRIOT, 24 Jun 82) 12

-a - [III - WW - 136]
NEW ZEALAND

Skipjack Tuna Catch in Local Waters Lowest in 5 Years

(THE NEW ZEALND HERALD, 26 May 82) 14

Foreign Fleets Blamed for Decline of Inshore Fishery

(THE PRESS, 16 Jun 82) 15

LATIN AMERICA

INTER-AMERICAN AFFAIRS

Colombia's Lemos Simmonds Criticizes U.S., Venezuelan

Stand

(AFP, 11 Jul 82) 17

NICARAGUA

Managu Radio Criticizes U.S. Law of Sea Stance

(Editorial; Radio Sandino Network, 10 Jul 82) 18

USSR

Sea Law Group Urges Maritime Peace, Security

(A. L. Kolodkin Interview; SOVETSKAYA ROSSIYA,

18 Jun 82) 2Q

Briefs

'N0V0YE VREMYA' on Conference 22

WEST EUROPE

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

Doubts Expressed on Ratifying LOS Treaty

(FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE, 10 Jul 82) 23

Newspaper Editorial

Foreign Minister Statement

SWEDEN

'DAGBLADET': Median Line Principle Should Apply With USSR

in Baltic

(Editorial; SVENSKA DAGBLADET, 25 Jun 82) 26

- b -
WORLDWIDE AFFAIRS

LEVCHENKO ON U.S. REFUSAL TO SIGN SEA LAW

LD101508 Moscow TASS International Service in Russian 0950 GMT 10 Jul 82

[Text] Washington, 10 July (TASS) — TASS correspondent Yuriy Levchenko reports:

In California President R. Reagan officially announced that his administration refuses to

sign the international convention on the law of the sea, approved on 30 April by

representatives of 130 states at the third UN conference on the law of the sea. The head

of the White House based his decision on the fact that this convention supposedly "does

not meet the aims pursued by the United States."

The White House demarche is the culmination of efforts over many years by American monopolies

and the ruling circles of the United States who serve them to wreck the drafting of this

important international document, called upon to settle international cooperation is the use

of the incalculable wealth of the world ocean for the good of all mankind. U.S. "big business"

saw the convention, which declares that sea-bed resources are the "common property of all

mankind," as a direct threat to its own plans for their rapacious and uncontrolled

plunder.

At the very beginning of last year," following the instructions of the White House, the U.S.

delegation at the United Nations blocked the adoption of a draft of the convention under

the pretext of the "need for it to be studied carefully" by the new Republican administration.

In January of that year the White House announced that the convention "does not suit" the

United States and categorically demanded the inclusion into it of a draft of half a dozen

"amendments," weakening its purpose and openly discriminating against the majority of

participants in the conference. When diktat did not produce an effect and the draft of

the convention was put to the vote, the United States delegation came out against its adoption.

As is clear from Reagan's statements, Washington's greatest fury is aroused by those clauses

of the convention which envisage practical measures for setting up effective international

cooperation in the exploitation of sea-bed wealth and its use in the interests of all countries

and all peoples without exception.

In particular, Washington does not like the fact that control over the extraction of valuable

minerals in international waters is handed over to an authoritative international body and

that developed countries will be in the position of having to give effective material assistance

to developing states by giving them the corresponding technology. As far as those provisions

are concerned that relate to participation by the developing countries and the national

liberation movements that are anathema to Washington in the revenues derived from exploitation

of the wealth of the world ocean, these are regarded by American imperialists as quite

heretical.

Observers consider the White House decision to be yet another attempt by American imperialism

to place its narrow self-interest before those of mankind, and to impede the development of

mutually advantageous international cooperation.

CSO: 5200/2095
WORLDWIDE AFFAIRS

USSR ACCEPTS ONLY HALF NEW ZEALAND FINFISH QUOTA

Christchurch THE PRESS in English 26 May 82 p 21

[Text]

PA' Wellington

The Soviet Union has accepted only half of. its 32,500-'

tonne fin fish allocation in

the New Zealand fishing zone

for this season.

The remaining 16,250

tonnes that "belong" to the

Soviet Union are likely to be

offered to Korea and Japan,

says the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries.

The amount accepted by

the Russians was virtually

the same as its actual catch

in past seasons, said .the

Ministry.

A spokesman for the

Soviet Embassy said that the

figure was a realistic one,

considering the Soviet fleet's

catching capacity and the

difficult conditions. . The

Russians must make their

catches far to the south of

the South Island, a^ area

notorious for high winds and

rough seas.

. "It is the Roaring Forties

down there and it is very

difficult fishing. Catching is

limited to only a few

months," the spokesman said.

The assistant director of

the Ministry's Fisheries Management Division, Mr Tom

Norris, said that the Soviet'

Union had asked for the

remaining half of its allocation to be reserved for it.

The request was likely to .be

declined.

"The normal practice is

that the quantity of fish now

taken up will be offered to

the other foreign nations.

The domestic fleet does not

want it because it is all in

area E," he said.

The fish would probably be

offered to Korea and Japan,

the two other nations whose

boats were * allowed to fish

within the New Zealand 200-

mile zone, as foreign-licensed

fleets. Korea had already

indicated that it would like

more fish, said Mr Norris.

A spokesman for the

Japanese Embassy said that

Japan had not yet been approached by the Ministry.

The embassy had not yet

taken the matter up with its

Government.

CSO: 5200/9097
INTER-ASIAN AFFAIRS

JAPAN AWAITS DPRK MOVES ON FISHERY ACCORD

OW291211 Tokyo KYODO in English 1204 GMT 29 Jun 82

[Text] Tokyo, June 29, KYODO — A government official said Tuesday Japan could do nothing

but watch closely the steps the North Korean Government would take for extension of the

current Japan-North Korea fishery agreement, set to terminate Wednesday, Japan has no

diplomatic relations with North Korea at present.

The official was commenting on the North Korean failure to extend the agreement after the

Japanese Government refused entry of a North Korean delegation into this country for

negotiations on its renewal. He said North Korean authorities had at one time intended to

send a delegation to Tokyo to start negotiations for renewal of the non-governmental

fishery talks but later had a change of heart. Extension of the agreement might have been

an effective card for political bargaining with Japan but the Pyongyang Government seemed

to have given it up, he added.

CSO: 5200/2095
INDIA

INDIA'S SEARCH FOR OCEAN RESOURCES DESCRIBED

Mining, Other Possibilities

Madras THE HINDU in English 18 Jun 82 p 8

[Article by B. S. Padmanabhan]

[Text] When in January 1981 the National Institute of Oceanography in Goa

successfully hauled samples of polymetallic nodules from the seabed—a significant first step towards exploitation of seabed resources—few would have

thought that in a year's time NIO would be gearing itself to make India the

first developing country to enter the area of seabed mining. But this was

what a party of pressmen saw during a recent visit to the Institute.

A chat with the scientists showed that the setting up of a separate Department

of Ocean Development and the Government's measures to build up material, manpower and technological capability have given a fresh impetus to the project

initiated by the Institute in 1978 to exploit deepsea manganese nodules. The

adoption of an international convention on seabed mining at the last session

of the U.N. conference on the Law of the Sea has imparted a sense of urgency

to this project as the prospects of India securing seabed mining rights under

the convention will depend to a large extent on its success.

"Pioneer Investor"

The international convention has accorded India the status of "pioneer investor"—the only developing country to get this status. The others to get

this status are: France, Japan, Soviet Union, and four consortia of industrialised States. India has now to show to the satisfaction of the International

Seabed Authority that it has spent at least $30 million (Rs. 27.9 crores)

before January 1, 1983 on seabed mineral resources exploration and present

two alternative sites of 140,000 sq. km. each, having equal commercial value,

in the Indian Ocean to the preparatory commission of the Authority which is

expected to start functioning by May-June 1983 after the convention is ratified by the required minimum number of countries.

India is keen to beat this deadline and make a successful bid for the mining

rights in one of the two sites. The NIO's activities are attuned to this

objective.
According to Dr. H. N. Siddiqui, head of the division of Geological Oceanography, the deep sea manganese nodules project was conceived as an interlaboratory effort in which a number of R and D institutions were involved, with

NIO playing the leading role. Following the hauling of samples of nodules

during the two cruises in 1981, three cruises were organised between March

and May this year in the central Indian Ocean. The nodules range up to 8.5

cm in size and more than 200 g in weight. Not only nodule samples but also

baseline data on environmental parameters were collected during these cruises.

In the coming months, exploration will be done in other areas in the Indian

Ocean with sophisticated instruments like deep underwater television cameras,

deep tow survey equipment and boomerang corers.

Prime Areas

The Indian Ocean is estimated to have 15 million sq. km of area covered by

manganese nodules compared to 23 million sq. km in the Pacific and eight million sq. km in the Atlantic Ocean. It is also estimated that the prime areas

suitable for first generation mining will be around 0.50 million sq. km in

the Indian Ocean, compared to 5.2 million sq. km in the Pacific and 0.85 million sq. km in the Atlantic. The total quantity of manganese nodules in the

seabed in the Indian Ocean is estimated at 150 million tonnes.

Based on the data collected during the cruises, NIO hopes to identify prime

areas for mining in the Indian Ocean. This, however, cannot be done by the

date set under the international convention with only one research vessel,

it has been decided to charter two more vessels to supplement the existing

research vessel "Gaveshani". The three vessels will undertake extensive

cruises after the monsoon to comb the Indian Ocean for seabed mineral resources

and to demarcate the promising areas.

Official sources are confident of India registering its claim for mining rights

well in time. Steps for commercial exploitation by mining and metallurgy

will follow. A separate organisation is likely to be established for this

purpose as NIO, being a research institution engaged in a wide range of oceanographic studies5 cannot be saddled with the responsibility of the commercial

exploitation of the seabed mineral resources.

Besides looking for manganese nodules, NIO has been playing an important role

in the development of offshore oilfields. Its work includes marine geological

and geo-physical surveys, which will help in designing platforms, selecting

submarine pipeline routes, locating well heads, checking the depth of burial

of the pipelines laid. From 1976 until now, NIO has carried out over 1300

line km of surveys for ONGC.

It has also carried out surveys for development of ports and harbours besides

undertaking detailed studies in the exclusive economic zone which have shown

that the lagoons off Lakshadweep abound in calcareous sands useful for making

cement and that the Konkan coast abounds in ilmenite.

Another of its activity is underwater archaeological survey which was initiated

last year at the instance of Tamil Nadu to locate ancient towns submerged
in the ocean. Carried out 35 km off Nagapattinam the survey revealed some

circular and rectangular structures under the sea. A full report will be

presented to the Tamil Nadu Government soon. After that a follow-up survey

will be carried out.

The ocean is also rich in fish and the NIO's Biological Oceanography Division

is engaged in studies to improve the yield and catch. According to Dr. T.

S. S. Rao, head of the division, the annual fish catch rose from 0.5 million

tonnes in 1947 to 1.5 million tonnes in 1971. After that it was stagnation

or declension.

But NIO studies have shown that the annual catch can be increased to six million tonnes. For this, large-sized combination trawlers are necessary. NIO

put the fish requirement of the population by 2000 A.D. at 11.4 million tonnes

and has proposed a plan for aquaculture in coastal areas which have two million hectares of brackish waters.

The plan envisages the setting up of at least one "aquaculture estate" in

every maritime State as a small scale industry by graduates in biology and

fishery sciences under the auspices of the National Science and Technology

Entrepreneurship Development Board. To begin with, a detailed project has

been prepared for forming such an estate in Goa.

Preparing drugs from marine plants and animals, controlling marine pollution

and utilisation of ocean energy are NIO's other activities. The Chemical

Oceanography Division has identified anti-fertility, anti-viral and analgesic

activities in some corals and seaweeds of Lakshadweep and Andaman coast and

these are now being screened at the Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow.

Accoridng to Dr. C. V. G. Reddi, head of the division, it will take two or

three years before these can be commercially exploited. So far 106 species

of marine animals and plants have been studied, of which 40 have been found

to hold promise from the bio-medical point of view.

The marine pollution control project is to study the character of estuaries

to ascertain the extent to which the various rivers pollute the ocean. The

rivers chosen for study are the Ganga, the Mahanadi, the Godavaria, the Krishna, the Cauvery, the Narmada and the Tapti. For the first two rivers studies

have been initiated at Hooghly and Paradeep respectively. "Gaveshani" will

be near Madras next week for an east coast cruise to collect data on pollution.

According to Dr. Sen Gupta, in charge of the project, NIO had already carried

out studies off Madras coast and found the water highly polluted.

Energy from Waves

In the field of ocean energy, NIO has developed a laboratory model of plant

for converting ocean energy into power and has proposed to set up a one-megawatt plant off Lakshadweep in collaboration with ITT, Madras. It has also

designed gadgets to tap the wave energy and thereby protect the shores from

erosion due to waves. Its wide range of activities made it take a leading

role in the expedition to Antarctica last year where it has left behind a

data buoy, developed by its scientists, to function as an unmanned weather

station.
According to Dr. V. V. R. Varadachari, acting Director of the Institute,

regional centres are proposed to be set up at Madras, Port Blair and near

Calcutta besides those at Cochin, Bombay and Waltair. Each centre will concentrate on a particular aspect of oceanographic studies. The Madras centre

will specialise in ocean engineering and ocean energy studies off the Tamil

Nadu coast.

To build up manpower, NIO started a training programme on the lines of the

one in the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. The first batch of 50 scientists

in different disciplines has been recruited and they will be absorbed in the

Institute after six months' training.

Oceanographic Vessel Described

Bombay THE TIMES OF INDIA in English 19 Jun 82 p 15

[Text] BOMBAY, June 18—INDIA'S oceanographic research vessel, R. V. "Gaveshani", has completed 100 cruises. This was disclosed to pressmen by Dr.

V.V.R. Varadachari, acting director of the National Institute of Oceanography

(NIO), Goa, recently.

The vessel, launched in January 1976 by the NIO, is one of the best-equipped

oceanographic vessels in the world. It has sophisticated equipment for all

disciplines of oceanography.

Pressmen who visited the NIO were taken aboard the vessel. It is 68.33 m.

long and 12.9. m. broad and can accommodate 19 scientists and 45 ship's officers and crew. It has four laboratories covering an area of 134 sq. m.

The ship has been stabilised against rolling with the help of passive tank

stabilisers. It has a photographic room, a conference room and a library.

The laboratories are equipped with spectrophotometer, turner fluorimeter,

guildline laboratory salinometer, Geiger Muller counter, wave recorder and

expendable bathythermograph.

For data and sample collection it has Nansen and Niskin bottles, sound velocity and current meters, submarine photometer, Zooplankton nets, corers, grabs,

dredges etc. Navigation instruments like Omega, Decca surveyor, Gyrocompass,

Radars, echosounders and satellite fixing systems are also available.

In her 100 cruises, "Gaveshani" has performed many tasks. The surveys undertaken have provided a lot of data and information which have increased considerably the knowledge about the seas around India. Surveys for submarine

pipeline routes, offshore oil fields, mineral deposits, living resources,

monitoring of oil pollution and location of suitable sites for effluent discharge are some of its achievements.

At the request of the ONGC, it has carried out surveys in the Bombay High

area and off Gujarat. The surveys—first time by an Indian vessel—have

saved valuable foreign exchange.
Mining ocean wealth got a boost in January 1981 when "Gaveshani" collected

"manganese nodules" from the Indian Ocean. India is the first developing

country to achieve this breakthrough. As these nodules contain nickel, cobalt

and copper besides manganese and iron and a trace of gold, the discovery of

nodules has proved to be of economic importance.

Apart from this, "Gaveshani" obtained some baseline data on the physics, chemistry and biology of the deep sea. Rich fish and prawn grounds off Gujarat,

Pondicherry and Laccadives have been located. The existence of a coral reef

off Malvan and other areas along the west coast has also been identified.

To monitor pollution in Indian waters, "Gaveshani" undertook a couple of projects. Physical, chemical and biotic factors were examined to suggest suitable

discharge points for industrial effluents and sewage.

Role in Monex

In 1979, the Central government sponsored a programme of Monsoon Experiment

(Monex-79), the first global weather experiment. "Gaveshani" undertook six

cruises in the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal and collected vital oceanographic and meteorological data from 534 stations.

Nearly two-thirds of the world's oil is transported through the Arabian Sea.

During a cruise along the oil tanker route, large quantity of tar balls were

identified in the sea between 37 and 168 nautical miles from the west coast.

These might affect the living resources of the Arabian Sea "Gaveshani" has

plans to survey the ares not covered so far.

The facilities available on board the vessel will be extended to train young

scientists. "We need many more such vessels. A new vessel is expected from

West Germany in March 1983. A vessel with Danish assistance is expected in

1984. In 1985, a French vessel will arrive. All these will prove very helpful for us," says Dr. Varadachari.

The NIO has plans to have regional centres in Madras, Andamans and Calcutta.

It has already centres in Cochin, Bombay and Visakhapatnam. The Bombay centre

is dealing with the pollution aspects. So far, the NIO had handled Rs. 70-80

lakhs worth of sponsored projects.

CSO: 5200/7043
INDIA

SIGNIFICANCE OF DEVELOPMENT OF SEABED NOTED

Calcutta THE STATESMAN in English 24 Jun 82 p 8

[Article by S. Sahay]

[Text] The Government of India's decision to take Delhi journalists to Goa and

explain to them what it has been doing to exploit the deep sea-bed minerals

in the Indian Ocean is in sharp contrast to its earlier secrecy (particularly

where its nationals were concerned, for the outside world did know about it)

when it scooped up a handful of mineral nodules from the Indian Ocean. Apparently what has encouraged it to court publicity (in its usual confused way)

is its diplomatic triumph at the concluding Law of the Sea negotiations, where

it managed to get recognized as "pioneer investor" country.

The triumph is all the more creditable because the "pioneer investor" idea

had been mooted to placate the USA, which had been finding fault with the

draft provisions on deep sea-bed mining. It was surmised by the Conference

Chairman, Mr T. T. B. Koh, and First Committee Chairman, Mr Paul Bamela Engov,

that if the USA and other industrialized nations could be assured unfettered

rights to exploit the deep sea-bed resources for the first 30 or 40 years,

then the USA would not be averse to signing the convention. Even though this

was not to be, the USA choosing not to vote for the convention, India did

demand and secure for itself the status of a "pioneer investor".

Investor

As the Draft Law of the Sea Convention stands today (its phraseology though

not the contents has still to be polished), four countries and four entities

have been granted the status of pioneer investor. The countries are France,

Japan, India and the USSR, including the State enterprises possessing the

nationalities of these countries. The entities are organizations possessing

Belgian, Canadian, West German, Italian, Japanese, American and British nationalities or a combination of them.

In order to acquire the status of pioneer investors these States and entities

must show that they have spent before January 1, 1982, $30 million in pioneer

activities not less than 10% of which must have been spent on location, survey

and evolution of the area intended to be exploited. Secondly, pioneer investor

nations and those to which the entities stated above belong must have signed

the convention.
Other developing countries too can acquire this status if they can show that

they have spent $30 million in similar activities by January 1, 1985 and have

signed the convention.

What is the purpose of devising this pioneer status concept? The idea is to

allow the countries having the requisite will and technology to go ahead with

the job of preliminary exploration and not wait until the convention formally

comes into being 12 months after 60 States have deposited with the U.N. Secretary-General their instruments of ratification or accession. Hence also the

device of a preparation commission, charged with certain powers and functions

in relation to the establishment of the international sea-bed authority. But

even this commission can come into being only 60 to 90 days after 50 States

have signed the convention.

What future does the Law of the Sea Convention have? Will it really come into

being? Even if it does, will it be a viable proposition?

Opions

The first point to be emphasized is that endorsement of the convention, at

this stage, by a country does not mean automatic adoption nor does rejection

imply automatic withdrawal from the convention. On April 30, when the decision

to adopt the draft convention was taken by an overwhelming majority, the countries that opposed it were Israel, Turkey, the USA and Venezuela. Among the

countries that abstained were Belgium, the two Germanies, Italy, the USSR,

the U.K., Poland, Spain and Thailand. Among the countries that voted for

it were France, China and Japan. While it can be reasonably assumed that

most of the Group of '77 will sign the convention, thus bringing the convention into being, countries such as China,France and Japan have kept their

options open. The same goes for the USA and the USSR.

But, assuming that the convention is ultimately signed by the requisite number

of States, what will be its legal standing? Some experts are of the view

that the Law of the Sea Convention is to be a law-making treaty, as distinguished from contractual treaties on the lines of the convention on diplomatic

relations or that on the law of treaties. This is clear from the title, preamble and the content of the convention as also from the language used. It

is emphasized that the convention actually condifies and incorporates the

existing international law as accepted through practice, as well as progressive development.

However, certain parts of the provisions are applicable only to those nations

that sign the convention. The provisions on the international sea-bed authority, and on membership make this amply clear.

Experts further emphasize that as far as the adoption of the convention in

April is concerned it has no legal consequence except as an indication that

the rules and norms laid down will be acceptable to the overwhelming majority

of the States. However, when the convention is actually ratified in the prescribed manner, it will be binding on all, including the countries that refuse

to ratify it. The reason is that when the convention comes into being it

10
will constitute the law on the subject and all the activities concerning the

sea-bed will be governed by the terms contained.

However, in the absence of participation by the industrialized States, exploitation of the deep sea-bed by the International Sea-bed Authority will

cease to be a workable proposition. This is so because the obligation to

provide the finances, the sites and the know-how rests with only those countries that sign the convention. And since financial contribution is on the

lines of the U.N., the USA and other industrialized countries hold the purse

strings. Contribution of other funds or know-how from all the Third World

countries can only be a pittance.

And yet, it would be in the interest of developing countries to ratify the

convention. After all it is the most elaborate attempt ever tried to codify

every aspect of the sea. It covers territorial sea and contiguous zone,

straits used for international navigation, archipelagic States, continental

shelf and high seas. It covers exclusive economic zones, regime of islands,

and enclosed and semi-enclosed seas. It seeks to protect and preserve marine

environments and promote marine scientific research. It ensures right of

access to landlocked States. It seeks to regulate the mining of the deep

sea-bed area. It provides for settlement of disputes. Not all the provisions

can be considered satisfactory but it needs to be remembered that it constitutes a package deal fashioned over more or less a decade.

Legislation

As things stand, the USA and the other industrialized nations cannot pick

and choose. They cannot subscribe to some aspects of the convention and reject others. Thus if they do reject the convention, they shall also have

rejected such provisions as the innocent passage of ships through the straits,

in which they have vital stakes. As far as the straits are concerned, the

extension of the territorial sea limits to 12 miles will imply most of the

sea area. The super Powers may try to prove that might is right, but then

they shall have committed an illegality. This itself will have its own implications. However, what cannot be failed to be noticed is that both super

Powers have not only reservations about the convention but also have antional

legislation on exploitation of deep sea-bed minerals.

As far as India is concerned, the pioneer status clears the field for it in

the Indian Ocean. The industrialized nations have concentrated their attention

on other seas. India has a role to play in the Indian Ocean area and must

seek to discharge its responsibility. It is encouraging to find that there

is a move by Sri Lanka to join hands with India in sea-bed exploitation. Other

developing nations may yet show interest.

The 200-mile economic zone and the 150,000 square miles to which it is initially entitled to look for sea-bed minerals open up new horizons. So do research

work in the Antarctic. While the creation of a Department of Ocean Development

is a step in the right direction a lot more needs to be done in having the

requisite men and machines. Also there must be a more imaginative attept

to create public opinion by making Indians aware of the potentialities of

the sea, of the new riches to harvest.

CSO: 5200/7045
VICE PRESIDENT OPENS DEEP-SEA FISHING PARLEY

INDIA

New Delhi PATRIOT in English 24 Jun 82 p 7

[Textj yiCE-PRESlDENT M. Hidayatullah"on Wednesday called

for development and modernisation of deep sea fishing industry in the country without forsaking the interest

of 1.9 million coastal fishermen who depend on the sea.

Inaugurating a tnree-day international conference on deep sea

fishing in Delhi the Vice-President said the endeavour should

be to link the modernised marine

. fishing with the traditional methods therehy affording benefits

to the traditional fishermen and

at the same time seeking their

active participation in the total

effort, reports UNI

He said India could become one

of the major fish producing coun

tries in the world with an estimated output of more than 4.5

million-tonnes of marine fish.

Exploitation ef deep sea regime could be a dependable

base for a major industry with

possibilities of multi-level development, potential in the country.

Union Agriculture Minister

Rao Birendra Singh, in his Key

note address, also warned against neglecting the interests of

small fishermen in the,, development of dee» sea fishing.

Development of deep sea fishing industry, Mr Birendra Sinsh

said, obviously would have a size- -

able impact on the economy of

the country. . But my concern

would be to ensure that the material advantages do not remain

concentrated in certain pockets

of rich and elite society. I wish

the toiling traditional- fishermen

of the coastal region are not kept

devoid of the benefits from the

envisaged development and modernisation of the marine sector.'

The conference is organised

by the Association of Indian

Fishery Industry and sponsored

T>y the Union Ministry of Agriculture m association wua tie

Marne Products Export Development Authority.

Delegates from the Philippines,

France, Indonesia, New Zealand,

Ut-ited Kingdom, and Singapo;*

a.'e attending the conference tiesees fisheries scientists and ex- 1 perts from this country.

The Vice-President stressed the

need for a judicious exploitation

of non-renewable resources in

the.sea and a rational approaon

in the exploitation of renewable

living resources. 'While developing ocean resources, I hope we

will not forget protection of the

environment from pollution,' he

said. .

Mr Hidayatullah., said while

the growth in "export of marine

food products was one of tn«

most remarkable aspects of the

country's economy, its share in

the world trade of marine products was still small, despite the

very high potential.

He suggested raising a cadre

of efficient deep sea fishermen

through proper training programmes for the Indian coastal fishermen.

Mr Birendra Singh regretted .that ' the exploitation

of the country's ma12
CSO: 5200/7046

rine resources at präsent- was'

limited only to one third of the

total estimated potential. Of the

present production of 1.55 million tonne«; from the marine sector, about. 67 per cent was contributed by the traditional se=-

tor, about 32 per cent by the

mechanised boat sector and only

one per cent by the deep sea

fishing sector.

.. The Minister said while the

Government was considering tp

redeem its pledge for faster

development in the marine sector, much would depend on the

response of the Indian entrepreneurs.

He could not understand, Mr

Eirendra Singh said, how the entrepreneurs could not make dee?

*ea fishing a profitable business,

although the Government of India offered such facilities which

probably were not available anywhere else in the world.

The Minister said the Government was considering to encourage state fisheries corporations

for deep sea fishing.

Another problem which this

country faced was poaching by

fishing vessels from other countries. Legislation was enacted to

check this poaching.

While this country was ready

for joint ventures and exploitation of marine resources in cooperation with other countries,

it was essential that others also

stuck to the rules of the game,

Mr Birendra Singh said.

13
NEW ZEALAND

SKIPJACK TUNA CATCH IN LOCAL WATERS LOWEST IN 5 YEARS

Auckland THE NEW ZEALAND HERALD in English 26 May 82 p 12

[Text]

The skipjack tuna catch in New Zealand waters this season

is likely to be the lowest for five years.

By the time the sevenmonth season ends this

month the catch could be

5000 tonnes lower than the

normal harvest of up to 9500

tonnes.

Slapjack failed to showup

off North Island coasts in the

numbers expected during

January, and foreign fisninj

vessels left to fish elsewhere.

New Zealand . shares its'

skipjack resource with other,

Pacific nations because of

the migratory nature of the.

fish. - -\

Dr George Habib, of the.

Ministry of Fisheries re-:

search division, said fluctuations in the abundance occurred because skipjack was

so widespread;

"We are only one little corner of a very large picture."

he said.

Six New Zealand-ownedi

vessels fkhed for skipjack,

during the season and although 11 joint-venture fish»!

ing licences were issued to

New Zealand fishing com-:

panics, only five United,

States joint-venture seiners

arrived.

Because of the poor start!

to the season, four of the

American vessels left New:

Zealand waters by February.;

The fifth made a successful1

trip when fishing improved

in March.

Joint-venture tuna fishing

is hindered by regulations!

which mean the vessels can-'

not fish within 12 miles of

the New Zealand coast.

The fish usually surface

f within the zone every two

jyears giving fishing comjoanies only a 50 per cent

chance cf successful annual

seasons.

" "Given the uncertainty and

the large costs of running the

vessels, people cannot bang;

abont for several months inI

B» expectation the fish will;

show up outside the 12-mile:

tone," Dr Habib said.

The American vessels had!

now found waters around

Papua New Guinea were a

viable alternative to fishing

off New Zealand.

Successful catches were

guaranteed off Papua New

Gamea, Dr Habib said.

1 "They do not bother coming down here because of the

limit on where they can

onerate."

CSO: 5200/9098

14
FOREIGN FLEETS BIAMED FOR DECLINE OF INSHORE FISHERY

NEW ZEAIAND

Christchurch THE PRESS in English 16 Jun 82 pp 28, 29

[Text]

The day of the little man

in fishing has gone, says the

Christchurch entrepreneur,

Mr Kypros Kotzikas.

Boat owner, exporter, merchant (he is the managing,,

director of United Fisheries,

Amalgamated Fisheries, and.

Blenheim Fisheries). Mr Kot-f

zikas describes himself as a'

trader.

"The 50-footers seud to go

out for two or three days at

a time, but now they are

working inshore," fie says

(four 50-foot boats of his are

based at Lyttelton). This has

led to pressure oh flat-fish

resources. , . ' . Mr Kotzikas blames the

foreign boats for the decline

of the inshore fishery, declining resources of tarakihi and

gurnard being left inshore off

Canterbury and fewer groper

and ling being caught each

year.

He.sees the big future as

being in the deep-sea re.

sources. At present he is

buying orange roughy from

joint-venture boats. This and

other deep-water fish such as

the hake and blue warehou

are good marketing prospects compared with the red

cod and barracouta which

are the main catch of the .

larger inshore boats at present.

But New Zealand should

have exclusive fishing rights

in its 200-mile zone, he believes.

"At this stage we are

competing with too many

foreigners. We should have

exclusive rights for 10 years,

but perhaps with ■■ some

overseas expertise.

"The South Island is a

good base for deep-sea fishing, and I know we could sell

the fish overseas."

Mr Kotzikas is flying

chilled fish to Australia two

or three days a week; the

amount is limited only by the

air-cargo space available.

He gets a higher return on

chilled fish in Australia than

on frozen fish sent by ship. A

small amount of his chilled

fish is going to Europe, and

snapper is being airfreighted

there from Auckland.

This is where he believes

the future lies: in high quality chilled fish flown to

fmarkets .where it can command good prices:'

' "Overseas,. New Zealand

fish, especially that from the

deep sea, is regarded as good

quality."

But to build up market

volume, steady supplies are

needed.. These- will',. come'. from big vessels which are

less dependent on .the

weather than the inshore

fleet. •;•...

Apart from dictating when

the' boats can go out, the

weather changes inshore salinity, both by rivers in flood

and rainfall. This affects

catches.

Mr Kotzikas sees the backbone of New Zealand fishing

becoming 10 to 15 150-foot to

200-foot vessels (the present

cost of these is $5M to $6M

each), perhaps with three or

four fishing off Canterbury.

The traditional inshore

fleet of 40ft to 50ft craft will

survive, with smaller

catches, compensated for by

higher prices for the fish.

As a whole, he believes the

fishing industry can be an

export earner1 for New Zealand second only to meat

production.

However, Mr Howard.

Shadbolt, managing director

of Independent Fisheries,

processer and boat owner,

sees capital as the big hurdle

for deep-sea fishing.

"You pay $1V4 .million for

an 85-fopter, and in deep-sea

terms that's just a canoe," he

says.

According to the Ministry

of Agriculture and Fisheries,

about 20 foreign vessels and

200 joint-venture vessels are

working in the 200-mile

economic zone at present.

No big foreign fleets have

been fishing inshore off Can-

, terbury since 1978.

Canterbury's traditional in-

! shore boats of 40ft to 50ft

worked to the 100-fathom

line on the edge of the

Continental Shelf until the

joint-venture and foreign

vessels came on to the scene.

When these bigger boats

arrived, the 40ft to 50ft class

found it could not compete

for the fish this far out. and

began almost exclusively

working the belt within 10

miles offshore, where the

smaller craft to 30ft had

been dominant.

Now the ; foreign vessels

have igohe from the zone off

the South Island east coast.

The joint-venture . vessels

have been pushed out to an

inner limit of 25 miles from

the coast, "and we're working like hell to get them off

15
the Continental Shelf," says

Mr R. M. Brown, chairman

of the Lyttelton Fishermen's

Association.

The Lyttelton fishermen

helped to originate the moratorium. At the 1981 conference of the Federation of

" Commercial Fishermen there

were many remits from associations about what was

felt to be the overfishing of

the inshore grounds. A composite remit was drawn up

calling for a moratorium,

and a moratorium Ijad been

mentioned by the Lyttelton

group. .... "...

Mr Brown sees no problems from New Zealand's

own growing big-trawler

fleet as long as it stays well

out.

Life hasn't been all against

the tide for the fishermen.

Better equipment is helping

efficiency. His boat, the 50ft

Ida Marion, has an automatic pilot, allowing the

crewman who would

formerly have been at the

wheel to be working on deck.

It has a radar which allows

the vessel to go put in poorer

visibility. There are two

sounders, one of which helps

to find schools of fish.

"We're doing our damndest

to catch them: "I'd hate to be

a fish today," he said.

Fo£ fishermen who have_

been prudent and planned

ahead such equipment is

beneficial. But it is a prob-

-lem for some. Sideband

radios are now mandatory,

and fishermen have known

for a number of years that

this would soon be the case.

But now that the authorities

are insisting that craft carry

them, the $3000 or so. for

each set is hurting some

owners.

Mr Brown's picture of the

future is one in which there

will be fewer fishing craft

working off the east coast to

the 100-fathom line, many

having been forced out by

rising costs.

But he believes the good

fisherman has a good chance

of surviving. The good fisherman is the man who can

work out his costings, has the

drive to go out fishing at

every opportunity, who looks

after his boat and keeps his

gear in good order and up to

date, and who has developed

a feeling for fishing ("it's a

hunting game," he says).

The importance of the

human factor is also emphasised by a man whose job

is assessing the potential of

fishing ventures.

"The physical input is a

big thing in fishing. You can't

make money tied up at the

wharf on a good day," says

Mr Kevin Wilson. Senior Appraiser with the Rural Bank

jn" Christchurch.

Maintenance is another

important factor, he says.

This applies not just to the

engine, but to the fishing

gear and the hull.

Fuel costs have hit fishermen hard. Once, perhaps 10

per cent of a fisherman's

turnover went on diesel; now

it will be as high as 30 per

cent, and of course, the turnover is much higher.

Nets have to be reslung

jeaeh year and the ropes used

'pre made from an oil'product, and have also been

Jrising with the price of fuel.

*' In all, 371 fishing boats are

"registered at Lyttelton. but

85 per cent of these are 10

metres of less, and 30 percent 'are less than five

•metres.

I Most of the catch landed

at Lyttelton is from trawlers

in the 40ft to 60ft class. Some

craft under this size have

fitted small trawl gear and a

few boats are set netting.

At Akaroa seven or eight

trawlers and about 2Ü

smaller boats seek mainly

rock lobster (the transport

costs are against wet-fish

catching), with a little setnetting and some line fishing.

Between the Waimakariri

and Scarborough, about a

dozen hardy tiny boats from

a registered fleet of about 40

still do seasonal set-net fishing. They are trailerlaunched.

A fleet of 15 to 20 vessels,

smaller because of the bar,

works from Motunau. mainly

taking rock lobster, but there

have been some set-net experiments.

• A local class of boat is

evolving at Kaikoura. according to Mr R: V. Reid, the

regional fisheries officer

with the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. It is of

about' 30ft, fast, and.'a better

sea boat than earlier'vessels.

It is ramp launched.

Since.the control of the

rock-lobster "fishery, many.

Kaikoura, fishermen have

taken up set netting.' Vessels

of 90ft and more from Nelson and Wellington trawl

further off the coast, and in

the last few seasons there

has been some seining.

About 50 boats are working from the Chathams rocklobster ground; virtually the

only wetfish landed is for

bait.

Timaru is a strong fishing

port. About 50 boats of the

traditional 40ft to 50ft inshore class and a few bigger

vessels make up a fleet that

ranges the east coast from

Akaroa to the southern tip.

Virtually no rock lobster is

landed: Timaru is basically a

trawler port.

CSO: 5200/9099

16
INTER-AMERICAN AFFAIRS

COLOMBIA'S LEMOS SIMMONDS CRITICIZES U.S., VENEZUELAN STAND

PA120305 Paris AFP in Spanish 1654 GMT 11 Jul 82

[Text] Bogota, 11 Jul (AFP)—Colombia has criticized Venezuela's position

in refusing to ratify the Law of the Sea signed by 130 countries, whose

approval signifies the fulfillment of an old aspiration to harmoniously

regulate the exploitation of maritime wealth.

Colombian Foreign Minister Carlos Lemos Simmonds criticized the stand of the

United States and Venezuela against this international instrument but expressed

satisfaction at the overwhelming support by the majority of the Caribbean

nations in facilitating solutions to current maritime conflicts.

"The treaty on the Law of the Sea, whose approval was achieved with very

important participation by Colombia throughout the initial debates, is a

fundamental document for the future, above all for Third World or developing

nations," he said.

He added that "the announcement that the United States will not sign it is

regrettable, because we expected more understanding and flexibility from that

country on issues of such importance. Now we need only to confirm what

position Venezuela will adopt with regard to it."

Lemos Simmonds said that for Venezuela the treaty would mean having to accept

mandatory international mechanisms for the exploitation of maritime resources

and the solution of the many conflicts Venezuela has pending with Colombia,

Trinidad and the Netherlands Antilles, several of the Caribbean islands and

the French Antilles.

The Colombian diplomat stressed that"everything indicates that the Venezuelan

Foreign Ministry does not recognize the new mechanisms that merged from that

Law of the Sea; hence, its decision not to approve it, expressing solidarity

with the United States."

CSO: 5200/2097

17
NICARAGUA

MANAGUA RADIO CRITICIZES U.S. LAW OF SEA STANCE

PA110409 Managua Radio Sandino Network in Spanish 1200 GMT 10 Jul 82

[Editorial by AGENCIA NUEVA NICARAGUA correspondent (Roberto Moreno): "Once

Again the United States Against International Law; This Time It is the Case

of the Seas"—read by announcer]

[Text] The Reagan administration has announced that the United States will

again reject the Law of the Sea that has been approved by 130 countries to

protect the maritime resources of the less developed countries.

On several occasions the United States has refused to recognize the rights

of nations to sovereignty over an area of 200 nautical miles, as stated in

the law signed late in 1980.

While Washington considered the law an instrument that limits the freedom of

private companies to exploit maritime resources, the Third World countries

decided to create the law to protect the wealth of the ocean floor near their

national territories from exploitation by large consortiums.

During the third UN Conference on Maritime Rights in 1974, Mexican President

Jose Lopez Portillo said that the new Law of the Sea being studied is nothing

more than another demonstration that the Third World has stopped being a

passive observer in international relations and has become an active participant.

Even though more than 100 countries of the world support the Law of the Sea,

the United States has continued to sail the seas and expllit the riches of

the poorer countries, ocean floors for the benefit of companies that make

enormous profits from the sea.

Militarily, Washington denies the existence of territorial seas, which allows

it to introduce its gunboats threateningly almost to the coasts of sovereign

nations, as happened in northern Nicaragua just recently.

The law also restricts the sale of technology for oil exploration in the ocean

subsoil, and replaces foreign exploitation of maritime resources with state

exploitation whose profits benefit of the nations.

18
The refusal of the United States to sign the law currently accepted by more

than 100 countries once again demonstrates that the Third World countries

and the United States have conflicting and antagonistic interests.

Washington's arrogant attitude toward maritime sovereignty has reached the

point where it uses economic blackmail to try and force the smaller nations

to open their seas to plundering by transnationals. This happened in Costa

Rica and other Latin American countries, which were faced with economic sanctions by the United States because they captured North American tuna boats

fishing in their countries' jurisdictional waters.

The refusal of the United States to recognize the validity of the law is interpreted as a new declaration of war against the Third World, since the

United States will continue to allow its civilian and military ships to transit freely along the coasts of any country, challenging the laws established

by the nations.

CSO: 5200/2091

19
USSR

SEA LAW GROUP URGES MARITIME PEACE, SECURITY

PM290903 Moscow SOVETSKAYA ROSSIYA in Russian 18 Jun 82 p 3

i [Correspondent A. Mozgovoy interview with Doctor of Legal Sciences A.L. Kolodkin, chairman

of the Soviet Law of the Sea Association and vice president of the International Maritime

Committee: "Reliable Security for the Oceans"; date and place not specificed]

[Text] A general meeting of the Soviet Law of the Sea Association and an international

symposium on the law of the sea in which a number of socialist countries' scientists

participated and which were held in Moscow were devoted to topical legal questions of the

use and study of the world oceans. SOVETSKAYA ROSSIYA correspondent A. Mozgovoy met with

Doctor of Legal Sciences A.L. Kolodkin, chairman of the Soviet Law of the Sea Association

and vice president of the International Maritime Committee, and asked him to describe

the problems connected with the exploitation of the world ocean.

The scientific and technical revolution, A.L. Kolodkin said, has opened up tremendous

opportunities for mankind in the sphere of the comprehensive use and study of the world

ocean and the assimilation of its resources. The volume of maritime passenger and

freight transit is increasing. The peoples' interests require an increase in the marine

products industry. Year by year scientific research into the ocean broadens, and measures

are formulated and implemented to reduce pollution.

Fruitful international cooperation in opening up the world ocean is inconceivable without

implementing the principles of peaceful coexistence, pursuing the policy of detente and

ensuring the peoples' security. As is well known, there are vast expanses of open sea

which are not subject to states' sovereignty and control.

The United States and its allies are trying to exploit this factor for the unrestrained

militarization of the oceans and the predatory exploitation by monopolies of the sea's

riches. This is why measures must be taken to block imperialism's aggressive aspirations.

The CPSU and the Soviet state are paying considerable attention to the constructive

resolution of these problems. The CPSU Central Committee report to the 26th party congress

stressed the urgent need "to begin the very important process of reducing the military

presence in various regions of the world ocean." This argument was further developed in

Comrade L.I. Brezhnev's speech at the 17th Congress of the USSR Trade Unions. Our country

has called for agreement to be reached on the mutual limitation of naval actions operations

and for confidence-building measures to be extended to the seas and oceans, particularly

those regions through which the busiest sealanes run, so that in the near future the

largest possible area of the world ocean should become a peace zone. These initiatives

were widely understood and approved by the international public. As USSR Foreign Minister

A.A. Gromyko noted in his speech at the UN General Assembly's second special session on

disarmament, "the United Nations must advocate that the arms race spiral not extend into

the expanses of space or the depths of the world ocean," since the significance of these

spheres for the future of all humanity is steadily increasing.

20
The USSR and other socialist community countries are playing an active role in all the t

international organizations connected with problems of the utilization of the'world ocean.

Graphic manifestation of the Soviet Union's cooperation with other states was provided by

its constructive participation in the many years of preparation of the new all-embracing

Law of the Sea Convention adopted on 30 April this year.

The West frequently and very loudly discourses on international law and the need to observe

it. In practice, however, the imperialist states comprehensively flout or ignore international

law, including maritime law. We are all witnesses to the Ango-Argentine conflict over

the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands. London has resorted to colonialist methods of "gunboat

diplomacy" and arbitrarily declared not only the zone around the archipelago but also vast

expanses of the South Atlantic closed to other countries' ships and aircraft. These

actions are contrary to the 1958 convention on the high sea and the generally recognized

principle of freedom of navigation. Britain's South Atlantic blockade has considerably

harmed international trade and economic ties. Because of the threat of being sunk, scores

of tankers, dry-cargo ships and fishing vessels are forced to stand idle in port. In

addition, even British shipowners have made a loss. As THE GUARDIAN has reported, they

have lost 22-25 percent of their business. Thus it is that such "sanctions" which on U.S.

initiative have become "fashionable" in the West also hit their organizers. I should

point out that at one time British lawyers, including as great an authority on maritime

law as Prof George Schwarzenberger, deemed the U.S. maritime blockade of Cuba an illegal

act.

Of course, London is well aware of all the legal niceties. Consequently it is a question

of the conservative government's deliberate violation of the generally recognized norms of

international law. The colonialist relapse in the South Atlantic is explained by the desire

of London and Washington to secure for themselves firm military-strategic positions in

waters where important sealanes intersect. Furthermore, the Falkland region is believed

to contain large deposits of oil. It was not for nothing, as the BBC reported, that the

United States provided Britain with the oil-exploration ship (Shtena) Inspector within

the framework of military assistance.

The aggravation of the international situation through the fault of imperialist circles

does not leave Soviet lawyers indifferent. The meeting of the Soviet Law of the Sea

Association unanimously adopted a statement which appeals for peace and security to be

ensured on the seas and oceans.

CSO: 5200/2095

21
USSR

BRIEFS

'NOVOYE VREMYA' ON CONFERENCE—Moscow NOVOYE VREMYA in Russian on 18 June

carries on pages 26-27 a 2,300-word article by I. Gorev entitled "In Line

With Everyone's Interests." The article sums up the results of the Law of

the Sea Conference, saying that it drew up a "fine, all-embracing convention"

which is a "balanced package of compromise accords." The article goes on to

list the "invalid" U.S. arguments against the convention and describes the

conference's "substantial concessions" to the United States and its Western

allies. [PM280921] [Editorial Report]

CSO: 5200/2095

22
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OP GERMANY

DOUBTS EXPRESSED ON RATIFYING LOS TREATY

Newspaper Editorial

Frankfurt/Main FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE in German 10 Jul 82 p 1

^/Editorial by "R.H.": "Socialization of the Sea^

ßexij The doubts expressed by German scientists even more than by the German government have now been confirmed by the United States! The outcome of

the last round of the LOS conference will remain nothing but a piece of paper

for the time being. There have long been doubts as to progress in international political life which the establishment of a new and comprehensive Law

of the Sea might bring.

What had started with the slogan "the common heritage of mankind" served

national interests in the main. The expansion of national sovereignty into

ever larger zones and the inclusion of the continental shelf ms bound to

increase the possibilities for conflict even more. The fundamental distinction between land and sea—which was poetically but usefully described by

Carl Schmitt—was abolished but that did not improve matters at all. The

sea—common heritage and all—is being exploited. Everyone tries to grab

as large a piece of it as he can. The "terranization" and "territorialization" of vast stretches of the oceans and the industrial assault on the

sea bottom are in full swing—all in the name of nationalism. To illustrate

the point: the seas surrounding the tiny Falkland Islands comprise an area

as large as Europe.

Count Vitzthum, an expert in international law, put it this way with all

the scientific fervor at his command in his book "The Rape of the Seas":

"General territorialization of the seas will not lead to political solutions in the long run which by their very existence attain to the historically requisite level of regulation."

But all the things that were not supposed to be nationalistic but internationalistic in a positive sense did not work out either. In exploitation

of the sea bottom, state-owned firms were assigned a dominant role in international cooperation with private firms—which amounts to a lav/ of the

sea which favors state capitalism. Beyond that, it became clear that the

major nations were to be forced to transfer their technology without charge

to all interested countries who are less efficient than they. Thus, international socialization of national capabilities was to become law in one

23
field of operations. And the German government, which had been willing to go

pretty far to show its good will, can now breathe a sigh of relief because

the Americans dared go "where angels fear to tread."

Foreign Minister Statement

Frankfurt/Main FRANKFURTER ALIGEMEINE in German 10 Jul 82 p 5

/Srticle: "German Reservations on New LOSj]/

ßtextf The position of the German government on the outcome of the 3^d LOS

conference has become clearer now that the United States has announced it

will not ratify the treaty texts. The German reservations were spelled out

more clearly than heretofore by the Foreign Minister in replying to an interpellation of the CDU/CSU fraction. Here are some major portions of the reply

contained in document No 9/1771 dated 22 June 1982.

German LOS interests, agreed upon by all concerned, were not easy to bring

out from the very start of the LOS conference in 1975»

The course of the conference was highlighted to a large extent by the Third

World and the long coastal nations. Beyond this, the accepted alliances and

common interest groupings were only partially effective at the conference.

It worked to our disfavor that there is no other larger-sized industrial

nation which is as much at a geographical disadvantage as we.

At a time when all the other Western industrial nations, including the United States, were aiming for an outcome to the conference of which we did

not approve, the FRG raised its voice and called for more consideration of

its interests. The German government was all the more pleased when the

newly elected American President Reagan ordered a review of the conference

results. Based on this review, the American delegation submitted a number

of proposals we approved of and supported with respect to deep sea mining

which had been a source of particular concern to us earlier.

These proposals were submitted at the 11th session of the conference. In

spite of our support for the proposals and in spite of the largely unified

position on these issues held by the major Western industrial nations, the

group of 77 and the East Bloc were unwilling to enter into a substantive

discussion.

This applies to all proposals with the exception of protection for pioneer

investments in deep sea mining on which agreement in the form of a conference resolution was obtained. The group of 77 and the group of socialist

states pressed for a quick conclusion of the conference. Despite our objections, the conference moved that all possibilities for negotiation had

been exhausted. At that point, the United States objected to adopting the

conference outcome by voice vote and called for voting by ballot. In the

vote held on 30 April 1982, the United States, Venezuela, Israel and Turkey

24
—all for different reasons—voted against adopting the conference texts.

The ERG, along with Great Britain, Italy, the Benelux countries as well as

the Soviet Union and its allies with the exception of Homania, Spain and

Thailand all abstained. In a declaration on the vote, the ERG expresslykept its options open with regard to signing and ratifying the treaty at

some later date. 130 countries, including France and Japan, voted in favor

of adopting the conference texts« The substantive negotiations of the 3rd

UN LOS conference were concluded at the end of the 11th session held in

New York from 6 March 1982 to 30 April 1982.

Substantive negotiations came to an end at the close of the 11th session

and with the 30 April 1982 vote on the treaty texts. Renegotiation of the

rules governing the sea bottom—which the ERG, among others, supported—

did not take place during the 11th session either formally or informally

due to the opposition of the predominant majority of participants (the

group of 77 and the group of the socialist states). During this session,

detailed substantive negotiations were solely conducted on participation

issues, on the protection of pioneer investors in deep sea mining operations and on the preparatory commission.

The result of the American review was in the ERG's interests. It covered a

majority of points which the ERG had criticized for some time. On sea

bottom operations, the findings of the American review did not diverge

from our own but did not go as far as we would have liked on one particular point: The United States did not ask for a reduction of taxes on

private and national deep sea mining firms.

Technology transfers without cost are not provided for. Firms wishing to

engage in deep sea mining operations, however, are obligated to transfer

any technology they employ—including technology employed by their contractors—to state-owned enterprises and in some cases to developing

countries at appapriate and reasonable cost.

For economic and organizational reasons, the German government has reservations with regard to limiting production in deep sea mining.

The German government considers the taxes proposed to apply to state-owned

and private deep sea mining operations too high and views them as running

counter to the speedy start of deep sea mining operations.

The establishment of the 200-mile zones contained in the draft treaty text

by and large corresponds to general usage indepedent of the conference. The

ERG has felt that some of the applicable rules could be improved—particularly those dealing with the legal provisions pertaining to sole-use economic zones. In reviewing the results achieved thus far, hower, one must also

take into consideration that there are limits to how far a large number of

littoral states can go.

The German government came out in favor of an extension of the time alloted

to the negotiations. It expressed its opposition to the statement by the

president to the effect that all possibilities for negotiation had already

been exhausted.

9478 25

CSO: 5200/2093
SWEDEN

' DAGB LADET': MEDIAN LINE PRINCIPLE SHOULD APPLY WITH USSR IN BALTIC

PM060927 Stockholm SVENSKA DAGBLADET In Swedish 25 Jun 82 p 2

[Editorial: "Zmeinyy and Us"]

[Text] It s-eems all the better, as Thursday's [24 June] SVENSKA DAGBLADET

reported, that Foreign Minister Ola Ulisten (Liberal Party) has, on behalf

of the government, withdrawn the "compromise offers" which have been made in

the negotiations between Sweden and the Soviet Union on where the demarcation

line between the two countries in the Baltic should be drawn.

This matter is not one that admits of some settlement through political haggling to be reached after lengthy discussion. No, the present case is one

involving principles, principles which must be followed.

Ullsten was right when he told SVENSKA DAGBLADET that "the Russians are good

at finding principles which benefit their own interests."

However, Sweden should spare the Soviet Union the future headaches of keeping

track of different principles for use in different demarcation line disputes .

The Soviet Union itself in a border dispute with Romania in the Black Sea has

adopted the median line principle in the case of the island of Zmeinyy. The

principle adopted here means that the median line model applied to Gotland

in the Baltic would fully satisfy the original Swedish demands.

This principle—accepted by the Soviet Union and simple and clear as it is—

should be pushed by the Swedes in future. The foreign minister can count on

total popular support for such a policy on Sweden's part.

This median line principle has two advantages which every other principle

lacks—first, it is based firmly on general international ideas of justice

and legality and second, it helps to avoid all the haggling this way and that

about such and such a percentage of the Baltic's none too blue waters.

Additionally, the Soviet view should be that the principle would be of great

value—since the risk that its submarines eould stray into Swedish territorial

waters or, even worse, naval restricted areas would, with its help, be radically reduced.

CSO: 5200/2090

END

26