250430

JPRS 81240

9 July 1982

Worldwide Report

LAW OF THE SEA

No. 202

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENTA

Approved for Public Release

Distribution Unlimited 19990810 099

Reproduced From

Best Available Copy

FBIS FOREIGN BROADCAST INFORMATION SERVICE
NOTE

JPRS publications contain information primarily from foreign

newspapers, periodicals and books, but also from news agencytransmissions 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.
JPRS 81240

9 July 1982

WORLDWIDE REPORT

LAW OF THE SEA

No. 202

CONTENTS

WORLDWIDE AFFAIRS

New Zealand Renews Fishing Pacts With ROK, USSR

(THE NEW ZEALAND HERALD, 19 May 82)

Briefs

Japan, USSR Resume Supervision of Salmon Fishing

ASIA

INTER-ASIAN AFFAIRS

New Zealand, Australia To Protect Bluefin Tuna Asset

(THE EVENING POST, 24 May 82)

New Zealand, Japan Disagreements on Fishing Reviewed

(THE NEW ZEALAND HERALD, 18 May 82)

AUSTRALIA

Government in Talks With Japan, Others on Bluefin Tuna Catch

(Richard Eckersley; THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 12 May 82)

Briefs

Gas Drilling Supply Ship

NEW ZEALAND

Trawlers Bought From UK Head for Deep-Sea Fishing Areas

(NEW ZEALAND HERALD, 17 May 82)

THAILAND

Territorial Waters, Other Problems Plague Fishing Industry

(Various sources, various dates)

Territorial Waters Problems, by Prachuap

Clandestine Dealings With SRV fill - WW - 1361

- a -

10

11
EAST EUROPE

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

East Bloc Law of Sea Symposium Adopts Appeal

(A. Cherepanov; IZVESTIYA, 13 Jun 82) 17

SUB-SAHARAN AFFAIRS

TANZANIA

Government To Conduct Scientific Research of Marine Resources

(Daniel Mshana; DAILY NEWS, 10 Jun 82) 18

USSR

U.S. Stance on LOS Criticizes in Soviet Press

(Various sources, various dates) 19

Reagan Demands Changes in Convention

LOS Conference Rejects Proposed Changes

U.S. Holds Out for Unilateral Advantages

U.S. Pursues Marine Arms Race, by Aleksandr Mozgovoy

Official Says Imperialists Ignore Sea Law

(TASS, 18 Jun 82) 25

Briefs

Oil Pollution Remedies 26

- b -
WORLDWIDE AFFAIRS

NEW ZEALAND RENEWS FISHING PACTS WITH ROK, USSR

Auckland THE NEW ZEALAND HERALD in English 19 May 82 p 5

[Text] Korean and Russian fishing boats can continue to fish New Zealand waters

until at least 1984.

Agreements signed in 1978 have been renewed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs,

Mr. Cooper, the Korean Ambassador, Mr Y. Hahn, and the Soviet charge d'affaires,

Mr. V. Azaroushkin.

The original agreements, arrived at separately, gave the two countries access to

New Zealand's 200-mile exclusive economic zone.

The agreements have been extended two years, to September 30, 1984, but otherwise

remain unchanged.

Mr Cooper said in Wellington yesterday that the extensions confirmed the value of

the agreements to both New Zealand and its foreign partners.

"The government has deliberately limited the extension to two years because the

fishing industry is going through a period of development and we want to keep our

options open for accommodating its increasing needs," Mr Cooper said.

The Government is also expected to extend its fisheries agreement with Japan for a

similar period under the existing arrangements.

The agreements cover only foreign licensed boats and not joint ventures.

The maintenance of the status quo will not please all the foreign fishing nations

as some, Japan in particular, have expressed concern over the areas it has been

allocated to fish and the fees and some technical terms.

Local joint venture companies looking to expend their activities at the expense

of licensed boats, particularly for squid and southern bluefin tuna, may also find

reason to complain.

CSO: 5200/9092
WORLDWIDE AFFAIRS

BRIEFS

JAPAN, USSR RESUME SUPERVISION OF SALMON FISHING—Kushiro, Hokkaido,

June 12 KYODO—Three Japanese patrol boats left Kushiro Saturday with Soviet

observers aboard for the first joint Soviet-Japanese supervision of salmon

fishing in six years. Three Soviet Fisheries Ministry officials and three

Soviet interpreters boarded the Japanese fishery agency ships to observe operations of medium-sized salmon fishing boats during this year's season in

northern waters. Japanese patrol boats began carrying Soviet observers in

1962, but the practice was suspended in 1976. The joint supervision has been

reviewed at the strong request of the Soviet Union following a recent rash of

illegal operations by Japanese salmon fishers. [Text] [0W121225 Tokyo KYODO

in English 1215 GMT 12 Jun 82]

CSO: 5200/2088
INTER-ASIAN AFFAIRS

NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA TO PROTECT BLUEFIN TUNA ASSET

Wellington THE EVENING POST in English 24 May 82 p 33

[Text] i New Zealand and Australia have agreed to dei velop a joint management

[strategy for'southern

'bluefin tuna, one of the

Imost .commercially valufable fish in the sea. •

"They saw the need for

i; and desirability of co-operatfing With us," said the assisj tant director-general of the

(Ministry of Agriculture and

* Fisheries, Mr John Bel-

'• grave, who has just returned

;from discussions with his

^Australian counterparts.

it "We will be able to get

(down to specific details

fwhen the Australians have

(discussed tiiq matter fully

jwith their »fishing com-

'panies."

A fisheries research

division scientist, Mr David

^Gibson, described southern

ebluefin tuna as "potentially,

|New Zealand's most valuable fishery."

I "The number of fish comiing into New Zealand's exclusive economic zone de-

|pends oft the number of

»small fish caught by the Ausftraliansithe number of large

pish caught by the Japanese

foutside' the zone, and the

number of large fish caught

by New Zealand's commercial fishermen," he said.

Southern bluefin tuna

spawn in the Indian Ocean

south of Java. They then undertake a three-year journey

around the south coast of

Australia before spreading

through the South Pacific

and South Atlantic oceans.

One-year-old and twoyear-old fish are caught off

Western Australia and three,

four and five-year-olds off

New South Wales. The

Japanese catch the adult fish

in both the Pacific and South

Atlantic and off New Zealand's east coast, while local.

fishermen catch them off the

west coast.

"In order to manage the

resource, we need the three

countries to agree on an international management

strategy," Mr Gibson said.

Scientists are concerned

that the combined catch figures for Australia and Japan

show that the weight of the

catch is declining while the

number of fish caught is simultaneously increasing.

They estimate that this

year's combined Australian

and Japanese catch could

reach 50,000 tortnes.

To maintain present

spawning stock, a reduction

to 28,000 tonnes is necessary.

The Australians doubled

their catch to 20,000 tonnes

last year. This year the catch

is slightly greater. Japanese

long-line vessels fishing in

New Zealand waters report

an average total catch of

5000 tonnes valued at $62

million annually.

The one-to-five-year-old

fish caught for Australia's

canning industry fetch 77c a

kilogram and mature fish

caught in New Zealand waters fetch $12 a kilogram.

They -sell on the Japanese

market for between $3 and

$30 a kilogram depending on

the quality.

CSO: 5200/9093
INTER-ASIAN AFFAIRS

NEW ZEALAND, JAPAN DISAGREEMENTS ON FISHING REVIEWED

Auckland THE NEW ZEALAND HERALD in English 18 May 82 p 6

[Text] |' The New Zealand fisheries agreement

(with Japan on conditions of access to the New

Zealand 200-mile zone expires next ihonih. It,

|is expected tö be extended, although Japan

Imay submit requests for improved access and

less restricted operations within the zone.

I New Zealand, in its documents delivered

fib the Japanese Foreign Ministry on April 30,

points out that Japan still inhibits New> ZeaMand fish exports by a series of quota and

^tariff restrictions, hot' to mention non-tariff

l;barriers.' .

I BRUCE ROSCOE in Tokyo looks at somit

i'of the arguments on fishing which still divide

iNew Zealand and Japan, four years after the

1200-mile zone was declared. ■■*

Japan's pelagic fishing industry is "on the skids with no signs of

improvement in sight," says a recent report in Japan's major financial

I daily, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun.

I And, according to industry representatives,

^Japanese fishing comfpanies are indicating renewed, intense interest in

latching larger volumes of

^several species from New

iZealand waters.

* Indonesia and Mauritania, Japan fears, are

planning to stout Japanese

vessels out; of their respective zones altogether

so that their own boats can

sseil more to Japan:

I Four Japanese fishing

^companies, Taiyo, Kyofcuyo, JJichiro Gyogyo and

Hoko, already have suspended operations off Mauritania over discord on

accessi

On yet another troubled

front, the Japanese Government this month filed

protests with the United

fStates against last month's

»cut from an expected

{287,000-tonnecatch quota to

Konly 172,000 tonnes for the

I second 1982 allocation,

^Cnntehtidus

|Problem

|, These and other factors

'%..—. though the species

| sought vary from region to

I region — are focusing

I Japanese attention on New

IZealand's 200-mile zone.

I It has been four years

(since New Zealand closed

I its zone to Japanese fishing

I vessels in an effort to

Isecure more access to the

f Japanese market for live1 stock and dairy produce.

[■■ Japanese boats soon

|afterwards were permitted

Ire-entry mexchahgelEor no

obvious trade concessions

I though Under severely

^limiting conditions — and

sstill bones of contention

•grate.

;; The Japanese Governteient is expecting revisions

iito those conditions imposed

:by the New Zealand Government; -as a result of

i joint fishery surveys

'recently carried out in

.New Zealand waters.

;

; Results of the latest survey, conducted by the

semi-governmental Japan

Marine Fishery Resource

Research, Centre, were: rej ferred to the New Zealand

Ministry of Agriculture and

Fisheries earlier? - this

month;; - ' ;

One persistent argument

concerns mesh selection;
that is, the choice of net

itype. Japan is not permitted to use nets with;

Aesh of less than 100 millimetres for fishing jack

mackerel üvthe zone.

But nets with bigger

fhesh let the smaller mackgrel, the only ones Japan

Ends of any real comIhercial value (for use in

fi'tempura" or "aji furai"

pishes), escape.

mepletion Of

ißtocks

V In the survey held off the

best coast of the North

Island (area "H") . last

pctober and November,

the Japanese research vesisel Smnkai Maru investiated the net question and

essed the'danger posed

other species by-smaller

ets.

Hie restriction is said to

*» intended to prevent

fpletion of stocks1 of

ung species, snappe&in

rtieular, of value to Niw

s--»aland fishermen. *

| Japanese researchers

ssay the survey's findings,

sand also data from an

learlier survey off the west

jjcoast of both islands

|(areas "H" and "G") on

jjack mackerel biomass,

Igeographic distribution and

Isize, prove New Zealand

'fears unfounded.

L The trawlers fish for

mackeral—and mackeral it

is they haul up. The fishing

is seasonal, they say, and

other species are not significantly apparent in>the

jmackerel schools. -Afi

s Though the research forpnat is mutually agreed,,

Sand New Zealand fisheries,

^experts participate in the-'

fwork on board, the New

IZ e a 1 a n d . Government

jwishes to discourage furrier research of this

[nature., mainly out of Tthe;'

ehef that local fishermen

ould regard any approval'•• a case of special treatent for Japan, since local |

oats also are not per- ;

ütted use of fine nets. "ff :

But the data collected

om these surveys, all

CSO: 5200/9093

fmade at the expense of the }

{Japanese Government

which has appropriated- a '

tyearly budget of abouf4'$X:

fpnillion for the research,

jare distributed free, to the

fNew Zealand Government.

f If few or no changes to

;he restrictions result from

gje research, by which

papan obviously* will seek

|o demonstrate that species

It wants more of are in

plentiful supply, New Zealand could well risk gaining the. reputation at Govlernment level in Japan

{that it is simply using the

Japanese Government to

advantage by getting its.

fisheries research done

tree. .. ..'.:.'

^Research Done

| Without Cost '

I if New Zealand accepts,

Ithe conclusions Japan

fdraws from the research,

fshould it dismantle the restrictions because such

|was, at least implicitly, the

funderstarofing reached between the two governments

before Japan compiled the

Research budget?

| Or should the^matter be

,1 treated as one requiring

Imore complex negotiation,

KcoMessions dependent on

IJapan lowering its considerable tariff and hori-

! tariff barriers against fish

|New Zealand wishes to sell

Ito Japan?

i Fishery research experts

fat the marine centre conItend that New Zealand

'fishery expertise has not

lyet reached the stage

Swhere persuasive arguments can be made for

fmore sales of New Zeailaod-caught fish against

Ithe expansion of Japanese

squotas for various species

:within the zone.

% This contention, however,

»should be wearing thin in

|some cases.

ft Solander Fisheries of

JNelson, for example, has

iurchased a tuna vessel

irom Japan, which transferred to the New Zealand

lag last month.

B It replaces the Taiwanese boat Solander chartered last year to work

toff, the West Coast, and

Ihould be much better

Iquipped to facilitate the

^ghtning-quick, on-board

processing and freezing of

funa needed to produce the

quality demanded by

lapanese buyers.

iQukkJreeze

Iproeess

f The centre says Japan

lias "plenty to complain

Ibout." It is shut out of

lour zone regions. For the

less productive zones to

!swhich it does have access,

Its trawling catch quota

last year was set at 66,000

fonnes, of which it managed to secure only 20,281

|tonnes.

t There are fewer complaints these day about

liquid, or tuna, though tuna

fishing fees are still claimied to be excessive.

f New Zealand, too, has

^plenty to complain'!

'about." Fish import reitfrictionsjonn a large secHion of the list of Japanese

ftariff and non-tariff bar-;

»riers affecting New Zea-'

Jland, Which was presented

Lin protest to the Japanese

^Government last month.

f In particular, New Zealand is seeking expanded

Iquotas for exports of

'yellowtail species, mackferel and squid or, as a free

^trading system would deWand, no/quotas at all.«

|,It would-be timely for

jthe industries and politi-

[Cians of both,countries to

{come to the negotiating

|table and trade equal coo*

iessionSi Next month thfe

fisheries agreement, allowing Japan access to the

fzone, expires. . >];'

i- New Zealand's fisti

|xports to Japan last year"

jwere worth. $36.5 million

jpif, a 65 jper cent increase

jgfcer l?8a,sal4 * f 1.§'
AUSTRALIA

GOVERNMENT IN TALKS WITH JAPAN, OTHERS ON BLUEFIN TUNA CATCH

Sydney THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD in English 12 May 82 p 16

[Article by Richard EckersleyJ

[Text] Life clearly isn't meant to be easy for the southern bluefin tuna.

In fact it has become an unrelenting battle to escape the net and hook, a

battle the fish now looks like losing.

The southern bluefin tuna spawns in the Indian Ocean south of Java. The young

fish migrate around the south coast of Australia, a three-year journey, before

spreading through the South Pacific and South Atlantic oceans.

They first return to the spawning ground when they are seven years old and, as

far as is known, go back there each year. They can live for 20 years, reaching

a weight of more than 100 kg and a length of up to two metres.

The tuna is hunted and harried throughout its life.

"In general they are caught as one and two-year-olds off Western Australia,

two and three-year-olds off South Australia and three, four and five-year-olds

off NSW." a CSIRO researcher, Dr Garth Murphy, said.

"Older fish are caught by the Japanese in waters away from the Australian

coast."

Dr Murphy and Dr Jacek Majkowski, of the CSIRO's division of fisheries research,

believe large catches are causing a continuous decline on spawning stock.

Unless this decline is arrested, there could be a catastrophic collapse of the

southern bluefin tuna population in as little as five or six years, they say.

"Scientists are concerned that the combined catch figures for southern bluefin

tuna for both Australia and Japan show that the weight of the catch is declining

while the number of fish being caught is simultaneously increasing," Dr Murphy

said.

This was symptomatic of a stock being continually reduced in size, he said.
—

r

©

ißc

ICo

'*&

» ' "ÄS >-

•sm« er.

-.*

i ••• iCO

**m7* Jt:r

z

ZJ

*»*:•: :.•:;

* •.•.v.v.v.*.v.*.;.;.;t

oz «&*<«* V.»* o

_J

#;.;.;.;.;.

:.>:-MI III

(/)

# •:•:•:•:•:>:•:•:•:

» LU

^»•c:,

z

^-v-0;-*

<

7

; Q. <

<"*'

*4»

"01 oo

esB3a

CB»S

.fl

'So

:I

-BO

'Shi

es

•oB

-«

W> •flI

?*

o

CM

,;i;„ _L_

in

o

LLi oCc
The southern bluefin tuna is one of the mainstays of the Australian fishing

industry. More than 20,000 tonnes of the fish, worth about $15 million have

been taken by Australian boats this financial year.

"A collapse of that industry would have profound effects on the Australian

fishing industry," Dr Murphy said.

The combined Australian and Japanese catch could reach 50,000 tonnes this

year, he said. To maintain the present spawning stock, the scientists estimate that the combined catch should be reduced to about 28,000 tonnes.

Dr Murphy said a framework for international management of the fish was now

being discussed by the governments of Australia, Japan and New Zealand. South

Africa would also possibly be involved.

CSO: 5200/7542
AUSTRALIA

BRIEFS

GAS DRILLING SUPPLY SHIP—Australian Offshore Services CAOS), part of the energy services division of P S 0 Australia Ltd, recently placed an order for a

new anchor-handling supply vessel to be built by Australian Shipbuilding Industries (WA) Pty Ltd at Cockburn Sound, Western Australia. The 2650-tonne

displacement ship will be the largest in the AOS fleet and the first built for

the company in Western Australia. Delivery is scheduled for September 1982,

after which the ship will join other units of the AOS fleet serving oil and

gas projects in Bass Strait and off the West Australian coast. AOS was founded

in 1968 and has ordered 14 ships in the same number of years from Australian

shipyards. Traditionally, AOS ships are named after the wives of P & 0 Australia Ltd directors, and have the prefix Lady. The new vessel, due to be launched

in late July, will be named Lady Elizabeth after Mrs Anne Elizabeth Blanckensee, wife of Mr Alan Blanckensee, a member of the board. The Lady Elizabeth's

principal dimensions are: overall length, 66.30m, beam 14.15m, depth 5.65m.

[Text] [Canberra THE AUSTRALIAN in English 13 May 82 p 23]

CSO: 5200/7542
NEW ZEALAND

TRAWLERS BOUGHT FROM UK HEAD FOR DEEP-SEA FISHING AREAS

Auckland NEW ZEALAND HERALD in English 17 May 82 p 5

[Text] The Otago Buccaneer

|has sailed from Dunedin

Ifor deep sea trawling

Igrounds and the first reIturns on a $15 million infyestment in the New Zealand fishing industry by

iFletcher Fishing Ltd. i

| The 85-metre trawler isi

heading for the deep water

irange roughy grounds with

|0 New Zealanders among

lie mainly British crew.

I Fletcher Fishing's other

aeep sea trawler, the Otago

galliard, will also leave Dunedin this week.

ffThe former Icelandic trawlers arrived in Dunedin last

tionth after sailing from

ritain where they were

bought last year.

T At the time the Government; decision approving the

«vessels' importation arid the

willingness by Fletcher to

pay full duty on the trawlers

lingered other sections of the

»fishing industry.

h The Government was ,aateused of favouritism, towards

»Fletcher because of its decision to defer approval of

sbther deep sea trawler applications.

jjnterest

! The $15 million investment

|by Fletcher Fishing involves

^pending on the .trawlers,

fshore processing and storage

.facilities. The company has

•estimated that its investment

Will generate a cash flow of

between $15 million and $20,

liillion in processed fish

lexports each year.

The venture attracted

strong interest from New

(Zealanders wishing to crew

the boats.

The managing director of

Fletcher Fishing Ltd. Mr jÜric Henry, said 200 applied

lor creWpositions.

Following interviews in

Dunedin 10 crewmen were

selected for each trawler,

pftey will join about 20 British crewmen on each trawler

;and undergo training.

tyThe company hopes both

trawlers will have, fulb.$few

i|ealand crews ^thiri'jtwgt

»years. - •. ;''< _.• ' ' "j

I Mr Henry said New Zea-I

land, fishermen still had to

|prpve themselves- on the 85:;

(metre vessels. !

:• • Out he was confident the

New Zealanders, who would:

have to spend up to two

weeks at Sea at a time,

(Would soon mäster the skills

Sieeded.

'The fishing industry gen-,

erälly regards New Zealand

fishermen as comparable j with any in the world and;

Capable of tackling; the ri-l

fours of deepwater fishing.

• Another fishing company,

Sanford Ltd, has re-equipped

two of its trawlers,

the San Hauraki and

the San Manukau, at

Auckland. Both

have been undergoing

sealtrials.

New winches and other

deepsea gear have been

put on the 30-metre boats

to enable them to fish in

deep water—a move the company was forced to make because of the Governments

reluctance to approve

further trawler imports.

The general manager of

Sanford Ltd, Mr David Anderson, said that despite

their small size the

trawlers were capable of

working in rugged conditions.

CSO: 5200/9094

10
THAILAND

TERRITORIAL WATERS,OTHER PROBLEMS PLAGUE FISHING INDUSTRY

Territorial Waters Problems

Bangkok SIAM RAT in Thai 20 Apr 82 p 7

[Thoughts From the News column by Prachuap: "Problems of the Fishermen"]

[Text] Recently, stories about several problems of the fishermen have appeared

in the newspapers.Even though the fishermen are not in the majority in the

country as are the farmers, there are still large numbers of people in this

profession. And this occupation^plays an important role in the economic affairs

of the people and country in general. This is because, besides the fact that

fishing products provide moderately priced food for consumption in the present

living conditions of the people, these are export products that earn an income

for the country that almost equals that earned by agricultural products.

Thus, concerning the problems of the fishermen, it can be said that these

are important problems that must be given attention. The government should

consider them to be problems that must be solved quickly before things are

too late.

Concerning the problems of the fishermen, from what has appeared in the news

recently, there are three major problems:

First, there is the matter of safety in earning a living in this profession.

In some provinces, the fishermen do not dare go out fishing because pirates

are waiting to rob and kill them, especially in the southern provinces. Besides

this, when they go fishing in international waters, they are robbed or captured

by foreign pirates, both military and nonmilitaryy who charge that they have

illegally entered and fished in their territorial waters.

Second, there is the problem of a shortage of fishing grounds. This is because

Thai fishing activities have made great strides forward. It is thought that

[Thailand] is seventh in the world in the amount of fish caught. And it is

first in Asia. The fishing products exported by Thailand are very popular

on world markets.

11
Third is the problem of low prices for duck fish, or small fish, that are

used to makerfish meal to supply the plants that produce animal food. The

low prices have caused great problems for the fishermen since they cannot

recover their investments, or cover the costs. Normally, more than 60 percent

of the ocean fish caught by the fishermen are small fish, or duck fish as

they are called since they used to be used to raise ducks.

Concerning the problem of the fishermen's safety and security, from pirates,

that has arisen in Thailand's territorial waters, it is my understanding that

this problem exists only in certain provinces. I am sure that if government

officials take a genuine interest in this matter, it will not be difficult

to suppress [the pirates]. This type of crime must be committed at sea, or

boats must be used as the means of transportation. Thus, it is not easy for

people to be pirates. The fact that government officials have not been able

to suppress them has thus easily given rise to a misunderstanding. For example,

people feel that officials have ignored this and are not interested.COr it

is believed that there is not enough manpower or equipment to suppress them

or that officials are involved or have secret interests in the activities

of the pirates.

As for the lack of safety of the fishermen who fish in interational waters,

this problem has arisen mainly because officials of neighboring countries

have arrested them on charges of violating the country's territorial waters.

That is, they have been charged with fishing in the territorial waters of

these countries. It seems that there is still disagreement over the facts

and that no final agreement can be reached.

The first problem is the difficulty of delimiting definite territorial waters

for each country. This is because, in the ocean, no clear markers can be erected

to delimit the zone as can be done on land. The opportunity to violate the

territorial waters of others arises frequently. Thus, it is not always correct

to assume that the fishermen have intentionally gone to fish in the territorialwaters of these neighboring countries.

Besides this, the behavior and actions of the officials of these countries

are involved too. That is, the government officials in the countries that

are neighbors of Thailand often have one thing in common with Thai officials

and that is that their incomes are low. This has caused them to be dishonest

in perfomring their duties. They must try to earn a supplementary income in

other ways. Two easy ways are to use their power when they cannot obtain the

profits they have asked for and to stop performing their duties when they

gain personal benefits in return for doing so.

The Thai fishermen have probably studied this situation well. That is, they

know that the officials of some neighboring countries like to make personal

profits, or that a "drop of oil" must be applied to facilitate things. But

later on, they may have been asked for greater sums than in the original agreement

and therefore been unwilling to pay. Orcthe Thai fishermen may have felt that

they were being asked to pay too much and so a dispute arose and they were

arrested by the officials of neighboring countries on charges of fishing in

12
the territorial waters of these countries. Many Thai fishermen are well aware

of what is happening. In some cases, Thai fishing boats have been seized while

fishing in international waters. Weapons have been used to force the fishing

boats into the territorial waters of that country. And in some cases, these

[foreign officials] have acted like pirates. They have used warships to intercept

the fishing boats and then robbed the fishermen when the boats have been full

of fish. They then return home. This has happened in the Andaman Sea. This

is the reason that the government has had to send naval warships out to patrol

the area, which has made things safer for the fishermen.

However, ever since the government announced that it had approved the expansion

of the special economic zone, or territorial waters zone, to 200 miles, the

matter of fishing boats being charged with having infringed on the territorial

waters of neighboring countries has arisen more frequently and more Thai fishing

boats have been seized. Thai fishermen feel that they are being harassed and

they question the way the government is handling this matter.

This is because, in solving this problem, Thai officials consider only what

is convenient for them and they have shoved aside the various problems instead

of considering the troubles of the fishermen and the common interests of the

nation. For example, when a fishing boat is seized by the officials of a neighboring country, they claim that it was seized because it was secretely smuggling

goods or that it had been hired to smuggle people into the country. I believe

that this is probably true in some cases. But probably very few fishing boats

engage in such activities since those who really work as fishermen would not

want to take such a risk.

Concerning using the fact that a few fishing boats have been used to smuggle

goods to make such claims or believing that all fishing boats are engaged

in such activities, I do not feel that this is right. This is like saying

that since there are a few corrupt officials, all government officials are

corrupt. This is not right.

Besides this, there have also been reports that preparations are being made

to revise the law in order to impose harsh penalities on fishing boats that

fish in the territorial waters of neighboring countries. There has been a

report that a law will be enacted to reduce the number of fishing boats so

that they do not have to compete so hard for fishing grounds that they fish

in the territorial waters of neighboring countries and encounter danger. I

have listened to this and feel very sad about how the various government units

in Thailand are attempting to solve this problem. Mostly, they are trying

to solve the problem by placing all the blame on the fishermen without the

government officials having to take any responsibility at all. They are just

looking for a way to improve their own standard of living and increase their

own incomes from the taxes paid by the fishermen. This method of solving problems

is becoming popular in government circles in general. This is a very alarming

situation.

13
Concerning the matter of the 200-mile special economic zone, Mr Praphan Manirot,

a fisherman, has doubts about the claim by the minister of agriculture and

cooperatives; who claimed that Thai fishing boats that had gone to fish in

international waters had been fired on and seized by Vietnam and Kampuchea

because they had violated the territorial waters of these countries. He asked

whether there couldn't be some clarification about how far out into international

waters Thailand's 200-mile economic zone extends and about how binding this

is on other countries.

He also expressed surprise that, at present, Thailand does not seem to be

defending its economic sea zone as strictly as other countries. Malaysia,

Kampuchea and Burma have many ships out on patrol but he has not seen many

Thai ships. Thus, he is not sure how much the announcement of the 200-mile

economic zone has benefited Thailand, and he would like to ask the government

to issue a map that would inform the fishermen and people in general.

Actually, having 200-mile economic zones was the idea of small countries that

are located on the sea but that do not have enough ships to protect or preserve

their natural ocean resources. They thus wanted to preserve the coastal zones

in order to preserve these natural resources and keep other countries from

trespassing in these zones. But, by chance, the coastal zones of each country

are different. If the country has a gulf, like Thailand, the 200-mile zone

overlaps with the territorial waters of a neighboring country. Thus, there

must be international negotiations in order to reach an agreement on using

the 200-mile economic zone jointly. Kampuchea cannot be allowed to claim the

200-mile zone for itself alone.

Concerning the fact that Thai fishing boats, which have been fishing in Thailand's

200-mile zone, have been charged by Kampuchea with infringing on Kampuchea's

economic waters and that Thai-officials have conceded that Thai fishing boats

have entered the 200-mile zone of a neighboring countryyeven though this is

Thailand's 200-mile zone too, I do not feel that this is correct. The government

must bear responsibility for our being placed at a disadvantage. When someone

announces a 200-mile economic zone, it cannot just allow them to do this without

considering the problems that may arise and without making preparations to

solve them. But when a problem does arise, instead of the minister who is

responsible for making decisions concerning 200-mile economic zones taking

responsibility for the losses or troubles of the fishermen, he has considered

solving the problem by reducing the number of fishing boats so that they will

not have to compete for fishing grouds. He has done this instead of trying

to secure wider fishing grounds or promulgating a law to punish fishing boats

that have been charged with violating the territorial waters of a foreign

country and instead of sending warships out to patrol the area to keep Thai

fishing boats from being harassed by foreign countries or from infringing

on the territorial waters of other countries.

I have constantly watched the way the government has tried to solve the fishing

problem. I feel irritated because, someday, Thai fishing boats may be forbidden

from fishing in international waters or a law may be promulgated forbidding Thais

from earning a living as fishermen.

14
Clandestine Dealings With SRV

Bangkok PHYA KHRUT in Thai 12 May 82 pp 3, 12

[Political Secrets column by "6 October"]

[Text] Fishermen are going bankrupt! In Thailand today, wherever you look,

people are praying for a better life.

This is a sign of poverty from which there is almost no escape. More and more

people in various professions are going bankrupt. They have had to change

professions because they were so poor.

The fishing profession is a profession that is now beginning to have many

serious problems. "Approximately 20-30 percent of the fishermen have already

gone bankrupt and people are leving the profession in droves because of their

large debts," said a news source in the Fishing Association of Thailand to

PHYA KHRUT yesterday.

"They are living like debtors, that is, they do not know what to do," said

the same news source, adding that the banks and private individuals have asked

them to pay their debts but the fishermen are not making any profits.

The thing that greatly affected the fishermen was the rise in the price of

gasoline in 1980. Since them, many fishermen have had to give up fishing since

gasoline prices were just too high for them.

Those who can put up with these prices are the wealthy fishermen with large

boats who can catch large quantities of fish and who have enough money to

operate their boats.

Another thing that has affected fishermen is that the price of "duck fish"

and fish meal is unstable and it is not high enough to cover expenses. The

price of fish meal is set by the factories that produce animal food.

The reason why fish meal has been so disastrous for the fishermen is that,

normally, 50-60 percent of the fish that are caught are fish that are used

to produce animal food.

Actually, the fishermen have continually carried on a movement for fish price

supports. And they have asked the government for special rights in purchasing

gasoline. But they have achieved few results.

Thus they have had to be patient and carry on their work as if "waiting for

death."

Besides this, another serious problem is that the quantity of fish in Thai

territorial waters has decreased and so fishermen have frequently had to infringe

on the territorial waters of other countries, with the result that boats have

frequently been seized.

15
Commander Sawang Charoenphon, the director-general of the Department of Fisheries,

stated that Thai fishing boats have been seized by all our neighboring countries.

No progress has been made in the negotiations with India concerning India's

seizure of six Thai boats.

The reason why more and more boats are being seized is that the declaration

of 200-mile zones by each country has resulted in countries frequently claiming

that their territorial waters have been violated.

And talking about the efficiency of Thai fishermen, or Thai fishing boats,

other countries are not as efficient and so our fishermen frequently infringe

on their territorial waters.

And the reports that fishermen are paying bribes to other countries such as

Vietnam by taking war materials to them in exchange for the right to fish

are certainly believable since otherwise they could not obtain fish to sell.

In investing in fishing, large sums must be invested, just as in industry/

in which millions of baht must be invested. The money that is invested is

borrowed money and so when problems arise on all fronts like this, large numbers

of fishermen go bankrupt.

There is still no hope of the government being able to solve the problems.

For example, the program to raise fry along the coast and similar programs

have not expanded as they should have.

The budget of the Department of Fisheries is too small, amounting to only

a few million baht each year.

The government is very strange. Hundreds of millions of baht are invested

in programs to help make things more convenient for the wealthy people, such

as building roads and bridges (which the vehicles of the poor people cannot

use). But it takes a very long time to approve programs that would help provide

jobs for the poor people and help improve their lives.

I just hope that the politicians do not wait so long that the people have

only one choice left.

11943

CSO: 5200/5664

16
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

EAST BLOC LAW OF SEA SYMPOSIUM ADOPTS APPEAL

PM151425 Moscow IZVESTIYA in Russian 13 Jun 82 Morning Edition p 5

[A. Cherepanov report: "End of Meeting"]

[Text] The ninth general meeting of the Soviet Law of the Sea Association and international symposium on the Law of the Sea, being held in Moscow in conjunction with the

oceanographic committee of the Soviet Union, has ended. Taking part in the meeting were

well-known Soviet academicians and lawyers, personnel from a number of ministries and

departments and specialists in the sphere of the international Law of the Sea from

Hungary, the GDR, Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and the CSSR. In the unanimous opinion of

the participants, the ninth general meeting was a further contribution to the elaboration

of problems of the present-day Law of the Sea.

In view of the mounting tension in the international situation and guided by the peace

initiatives put forward by L.I. Brezhnev at the 26th CPSU Congress and aimed at reaching

agreement on "lowering the military presence in various regions of the world ocean"

and also by the proposal he put forward at the 17th Soviet Trade Union Congress regarding

the extension of "confidence-building measures to the seas and oceans, especially those

regions through which the busiest sea routes run," the meeting participants adopted a

statement entitled "For Peace and Security on the Seas and Oceans."

The statement says, in particular, that the participants in the ninth general meeting

of the Soviet Law of the Sea Association resolutely support these peace initiatives

and call "on everyone who is associated in any way through their activity with the

study and utilization of the world ocean to do everything necessary to ensure peace

and security on the seas and oceans and thereby to make a constructive contribution

to the common cause of the struggle for world peace."

CSO: 5200/2088

17
TANZANIA

GOVERNMENT TO CONDUCT SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH OF MARINE RESOURCES

Dar es Salaam DAILY NEWS in English 10 Jun 82 p 1

{Article by Daniel Mshana]

[Excerpt] The Government intends to undertake an intensive scientific research

of marine resources in the country's coastal waters beginning next week.

The Director of Fisheries in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism,

Ndugu G.K. Libaba, said this in Dar es Salaam yesterday.

He said a Norwegian-built vessel "Dr. Fridjof Nansen" would anchor at the Dar

es Salaam port today ready to explore the country's marine resources.

The decision followed the increasing need to know precisely the abundance of

the country's fishery resources, their seasonal concentration and immigration

pattern.

He said the government had been much concerned with the present tendency by

fishermen to fish haphazardly, unaware that fish, like animals, migrate from

one area to another in search of food.

"The research will not only facilitate the identification by our fishermen of

various areas where fish abundantly breed, but the whole exercise is also aimed

to identifying areas with rare marine species so that they can be protected",

Ndugu Libaba said.

He said the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) agreed to

despatch an exploratory vessel to map out resources on biomass concentrations

and physical/chemical oceanographic parameters.

He said that each cruise to take four weeks, would be in three phases during

periods of South-East Monsoon beginning this month. Other cruises would be

in October and in December.

Ndugu Libaba said the vessel had a crew of 13 scientists led by Captain R.

Vindenes. "Some students from Mbegani Fisheries Development centre in Bagamoyo will be attached to the ship to learn various things as part of their

field work. Four marine biologists from the University of Dar es Salaam, the

Marine Science Institute in Zanzibar and the Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute, will also be involved", he explained.

CSO: 5200/5665

18
USSR

U.S. STANCE ON LOS CRITICIZED IN SOVIET PRESS

Reagan Demands Changes in Convention

Moscow IZVESTIYA in Russian 30 Mar 82 p 5

[Article: "'Law' as Washington Sees It"]

[Text] Open disregard of the opinion of most states—this is the position occupied

by the American delegation to the 11th Session of the Third UN Conference on the Law

of the Sea, presently convened in New York.

As we know, for the last 10 years the absolute majority of the more than 150 countries participating in the conference moved step by step, in a display of good will,

toward achievement of mutually acceptable agreements, ones which were expressed in

the draft convention on the law of the sea that was presented to the present session.

The USA is doing everything it can to torpedo the work of the conference.

Thus President R. Reagan himself declared even before the 11th Session convened that

all items which are in conflict with the American principles of free enterprise—

that is, the principles of totally unconcealed imperialist plunder of the riches of

the World Ocean—had to be removed from the document which has already been prepared

and coordinated upon within the UN. But there is more. The American delegation

presented 43 pages of demands which fundamentally alter the interpretation of most

of the clauses contained in the draft convention. And inasmuch as Washington's

demands are encountering resistance, the English newspaper FINANCIAL TIMES reports,

the USA and a number of its allies intend to conclude a separate treaty among themselves for monopolistic development of the natural resources of the ocean floor.

Most participants of the UN Conference on the Law of the Sea validly interpret the

claims of the White House as a threat to the sovereign rights of independent states

and as a return to colonial orders that have faded into the distant past.

LOS Conference Rejects Proposed Changes

Moscow IZVESTIYA in Russian 1 Apr 82 p 4

[Article: "Proposals Rebuffed"]

[Text] Relying on its powerful navy and on its technical advantage over many

countries, the USA intends to be the first to get its hands: on the treasurehouse of

19
minerals hidden in the ocean floor. It is with this goal in mind that official

representatives of Washington are structuring their obstructive tactics in the excessively drawn out UN negotiations to develop an international treaty on the law

of sea.

A draft convention satisfying the interests of the overwhelming majority of the

planet's countries was prepared after many years of effort by member states of the

Permanent UN Conference on the Law of the Sea. The participants of the present

session of the conference on the law of the sea demand approval of the draft convention as an entire package—that is, they demand approval of the fundamental

articles of the treaty. As has been demonstrated in the statements made by representatives of many countries participating in the conference, the actions of the

USA are aimed at fundamentally scrapping the articles of the convention concerned

with deep-sea mineral extraction. Washington and a small group of its followers are

working for unilateral advantages for their monopolies. They have absolutely no sense

of reality, they cannot understand that the time of unrestricted dictatorship has

faded irreversibly into the past. The overwhelming majority of the participants

of the present session of the conference on the law of the sea, convened at the UN,

made this clear to the presumptuous pretenders of the riches of the sea bed. The

present session rejected all of the USA's attempts to amend, in behalf of its monopolies, already agreed-upon draft document regulating the rules of utilizing the

World Ocean. The session's participants totally refused to examine the subversive

American proposals. This is not the first time Washington and its accomplices have

found themselves standing alone in the solution of the most important international

problems.

U.S. Holds Out for Unilateral Advantages

Moscow PRAVDA in Russian 3 Apr 82 p 5

[Article: "The USA's Self-interested Claims"]

[Text] The USA is attempting to drag out the UN Conference on the Law of the Sea,

which has already made a decision to finish writing, during the present session,

an international convention which will establish, for the first time in history,

the general norms and rules of using the resources of the World Ocean in behalf of

all mankind.

In the back rooms of the conference, the American representatives are intensively

"working over" the delegations from the other countries these days with the purpose

of forcing them to reenter negotiations in the course of which the USA's selfinterested demands could be satisfied at the expense of the interests of other

countries.

Speaking at the plenary session, G. Malone, the head of the American delegation,

once again repeated demands that have already been rejected by the conference as

totally inaceeptable, as dismantling the entire package of agreements arrived at

by more than 150 countries.

Work went on for about 8 years on the draft convention. The result of this work

was a carefully balanced document consisting of more than 300 articles.

20
The following incident is typical of the imperial position occupied by the USA at

the session: The newspaper NEW YORK TIMES published an editorial in which the

opinion was stated that the USA will waive some of its objections to the draft convention and that a compromise will be achieved. This proposal from the American

newspaper was met by a hostile reception from the American delegation. It immedi- :

ately made an arrogant statement emphasizing that "in the next few weeks all countries

must apply an enormous effort to make the United States agree to support and sign

the draft convention."

Responding to this big power declaration, A. Prandler, the chief of the Hungarian

delegation said that the sincere effort to come closer to the position of the overwhelming majority of the member states of the conference must be made not by "all

countries" but by the United States. As with the delegations from other countries,

the Hungarian delegation has no intention of yielding to Washington's attempt to

achieve unilateral advantages for itself.

At the conference, the USA's position is enjoying support—though far from unquestioning—only from four countries: England, France, the FRG and Japan. The rest

of the states, irrespective of their political orientation, decisively reject

Washington's blackmail.

S. P. Kozyrev, the chief of the USSR delegation, noted that the absolute majority of

the states have voted in favor of the convention's adoption at the present session

on the basis of the existing draft. The U.S. delegation is opposing this position

with an obstructionist line.

In our opinion, the USSR representative continued, all of the prerequisites for

adopting the convention have been fulfilled at the conference. The USSR delegation

expresses the hope that the USA and some of its allies will put an end to their

attempts to obtain unilateral benefits and privileges at the expense of the interests

of other countries and nations. Only a convention based on the principle of full

sovereign equality of all of .its participants would satisfy the interests of equitable cooperation among states, the interests of peace and international security.

U.S. Pursues Marine Arms Race

Moscow SOVETSKAYA ROSSIYA in Russian 21 Apr 82 p 3

[Article by Aleksandr Mozgovoy: "Who Is Muddying Up the Waters of the Ocean?"]

[Text] The board of directors of the American multisector Tenneco Corporation

recently announced that it will lay off 5,000 workers. The company's bosses.gave

"financial difficulties" as the excuse for their decision. This same corporation

took out a one-page advertisement in the newspapers. The headline declared m large

letters: "Mr President, we've started!" What were they talking about? A nuclear

aircraft carrier and atomic submarine were lowered simultaneously from Tenneco's

building dock and handed over to the U.S. Navy. It was in this way that the firm's

executives decided to gain the gratitude of the White House which is spiraling the

race in marine arms upward.

21
Production is closing down in civilian sectors and laborers are being thrown into

the streets in the united States with the blessing of the present Republican administration, while concurrently the bank accounts of the businessmen of death are

growing. The Pentagon's ship building program will mean a golden rain of profits

for the bosses of Tenneco and similar corporations: $100 billion will be spent in

the next few years to acquire 150 warships.

Some people in Washington intend to transform the entire World Ocean into an "American lake." The latest conception of "one giant war" is foreseen as a means for

achieving this goal. Its authors are Pentagon chief C. Weinberger and Secretary of

the Navy J. Lehman. The latter has declared the era of the "great American fleet

which will be able to operate without any problems simultaneously in different

regions of the world—in the Far and Near East, in the Persian Gulf and the Indian

Ocean, in the North and South Atlantic, in the Mediterranean and Caribbean seas,

in the Eastern Pacific and on the marine oil transportation routes about Africa."

The adventuristic nature of such plans is obvious. Of course, the United States will

not be able to frighten the USSR and its allies with its growing militaristic preparations in the oceans. As was emphasized many times by the Soviet government,

the socialist countries possess the necessary potentials to foil the plans of imperialism aimed at achieving military superiority. At the same time we cannot close

our eyes to the serious consequences of the race in marine arms. After all, it is

threatening the security of the peoples of all continents.

Atomic submarines outfitted with strategic missiles patrol vast regions of the

ocean. The Soviet Union has indicated the need for correcting this situation many

times. During the 32d Session of the UN General Assembly the USSR made an appeal

to begin negotiations with the purpose of reaching agreement on barring nuclear

missiles ships from certain regions of the World Ocean and on other possible

measures for limiting the nuclear arms race there. In 1978 our country turned to

the USA with a proposal to remove, from the Mediterranean Sea, Soviet and American

ships and submarines carrying nuclear weapons.

Alas, these initiatives were not met with any understanding in Washington. Moreover

the United States is intending to significantly increase the "sphere of activities"

of its strategic naval forces. The Pentagon is not hiding its plans, in particular,

for deploying its latest "Ohio" class atomic submarines, each armed with 24 Trident

missiles, in the Indian Ocean and the South Pacific. That is, South and Southeast

Asia as well as Australia and New Zealand will essentially be transformed into

nuclear hostages of the USA.

Prevent atomic catastrophe, including one originating from the oceans: This is the

noble goal the Soviet Union has posed to itself. In his speech to the 17th Congress

of Trade Unions, Comrade L. I. Brezhnev proposed mutually limiting the activities

of the NATO and Warsaw Pact navies. "In particular, we felt that it might be

possible to bar the missile submarines of both sides from the vast regions presently

subjected to combat patrol, to limit their cruising to within mutually agreed upon

boundaries," he declared. Acceptance of this proposal would have reduced the

"threshold of mistrust" between the East and West, and it would have been a major

step on the road to disarmament and to consolidation of peace.

22
But unfortunately the U.S administration rejected the Soviet initiative. In the

words of a White House representative, it supposedly "fully satisfies only the

mercenary interests of the Russians." The obvious question is: What is "mercenary"

about this? After all, the limitations must apply equally to submarines of the USSR

Navy as well. The restraint our country is calling for satisfies the interests of

the security of the American people as Well. Obviously Washington is even prepared

to sacrifice these interests in support of the plans of the militarists. And their

ambitions truly know no bounds.

Expansion in all directions: This is the essence of the Pentagon's ocean strategy.

The flywheel of military preparations is turning at top speed. Naval maneuvers

barely manage to come to an end before others are begun. Just in the Caribbean

basin alone the USA and its allies conducted seven exercises since October of last

year! They involved hundreds of ships and airplanes, and many thousands of seamen

and officers. "We can quickly organize a blockade of the Caribbean Sea, even

though this step would be an act of war," is what American Secretary of the Navy

J. Lehman boasts in hegemonistic passion. It would not be difficult to surmise what

he is talking about—organizing aggression against Cuba and Nicaragua. That same

L%hmänis also posing a threat to Libya with his intentions of sending a squadron

of the U.S. Sixth Fleet into the Gulf of Sidra. Last year such maneuvers led to

armed confrontation, which almost turned into a serious crisis in the Mediterranean

Sea. But the Pentagon has decided to repeat this provocation.

On the initiative of Sri Lanka, back in 1971 the UN General Assembly adopted a

declaration making the Indian Ocean a zone of peace. In order to achieve the

fastest possible implementation of such an important decision, the Soviet Union

initiated negotiations with the United States on limiting and subsequently reducing

military activities in this region. But the USA broke the dialog unilaterally.

Washington also broke up preparations for an international conference on the Indian

Ocean in 1981, and it is doing everything it can to keep such a forum from convening

in the future.

The Pentagon is engaging in subversive activities with the purpose of discrediting

Sri Lanka. Everything appeared innocent at first glance. The New York-based

Ridaco International Company proposed, to the government of this island state,

construction of an oil storage site at Sri Lanka's port of Trincomalee. What for?

To refuel ships of the U.S. Seventh Fleet. The plan is simple: Were Colombo to

give its consent to creation of an American base, Sri Lanka's authority as the

initiator of the declaration on the zone of peace would be undermined.

The Soviet Union's position in relation to the Indian Ocean is well known. The

USSR is prepared to continue negotiations at any time with the USA on limiting

military activities in this region. Our country envisions no obstacles before itself to extending similar measures to the Pacific Ocean.

But turning the facts upside down, Washington's propaganda machine is attempting to

show that our country is the main source of "threats" in the oceans. What can we

say? The Pentagon has always said the same thing as an excuse for its own malicious

preparations. Meanwhile the USA's imperial pretentions are perpetually visible

through this thin disguise. To persuade oneself of this, it would be sufficient to

look at the proceedings of the 11th UN Session on the Law of the Sea in New York.

23
The American delegation is once again attempting to scuttle the previously agreed

upon text of the convention with the goal of preventing just international control

over extraction of resources from the sea bed. The unprecedented growth of the American navy can be explained in great part by Uncle Sam's aspiration to establish police

control over ocean regions rich in valuable raw materials.

Now the attention of international society is riveted on the South Atlantic. Steering away from a peaceful solution to the Falklands problem, London sent a squadron

of 40 warships to the islands and declared the region of the archipelago a "war zone."

It is premature to predict the future course of events at the moment, but one thing

is clear: NATO has decided to capitalize on the crisis by spiraling the arms race

at sea upward one more turn.

These militaristic intrigues on the oceanic lines of communication are leading to

tragic consequences even in peacetime. In spring of last year the American atomic

submarine "George Washington" collided with the Japanese vessel "Nissio-Maru" and

sank it. Almost the entire crew perished. While flying over the Mediterranean Sea,

a DC-9 airliner belonging to Italy's ATI veered away from a missile launched by one

of the ships of the U.S. Sixth Fleet at the very last moment. In March of this year

the American submarine "Jacksonville" rammed a Turkish steamship. Luckily the

damaged vessel was able to reach a nearby port. The list of such disasters and

accidents can be lengthened further. A special commission of the U.S. House of

Representatives revealed that almost a fourth of the personnel of the U.S. Navy

use hard drugs regularly. And imagine, these potion-befuddled people are standing

watch at the helms of ships and the control consoles of weapons!

Considering the continually growing danger of the race in marine arms and of the

military activities on ocean lines of communication, the Soviet Union is lobbying

for their fastest possible elimination. "We would also be prepared to discuss the

issue of extending measures of trust to the seas and oceans, especially to those

regions through which the busiest marine routes pass," emphasized Leonid II'ich

Brezhnev in his speech to the 17th Congress of Trade Unions. "In a word, we are^

in favor of making the largest possible part of the World Ocean a zone of peace in

the immediate future." This proposal is supported by all to whom peace on the

planet is precious.

11004

CSO: 5200/1001

24
USSR

OFFICIAL SAYS IMPERIALISTS IGNORE SEA LAW

LD180944 Moscow TASS in English 0845 GMT 18 Jun 82

["Flouting the Law of the Sea" — TASS headline; quotation marks as received]

[Text] Moscow June 18 TASS — "Fruitful international cooperation in using the world

ocean is inconceivable without observing the principles of peaceful coexistence and

pursuing a policy of detente and ensuring international security', A. Kolodkin, doctor

of science (jurisprudence), chairman of the Soviet Association on the Law of the Sea and

vice-president of the International Maritime Committee, said in an interview with the newspaper SOVETSKAYA ROSSIYA. As is known, vast expanses on the high seas do not come under

the sovereignty and control of states. The United States and its allies are trying to use

this fact for militarising the oceans and for the ruthless exploitation of the resources

of the seabed by monopolies. Therefore it is necessary to take measures that would raise

a barrier to the aggressive aspirations of imperialism." They in the West often and

loudly talk of international law and the need for observing it. But in practice inter- __

national law, including the Law of the Sea, is violated or ignored by imperialist states,

A. Kolodkin stressed.

We all witnessed the Anglo-Argentine conflict over the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands, Kolodkin

said London resorted to the colonialist methods of "gunboat policy and declared the zone

around the archipelago as well as vast expanses in the South Atlantic closed to the ships

and planes of other countries. Such actions contradict the 1958 convention on open sea and

the generally recognized principle of the freedom of navigation. Britain s blockade_of

the South Atlantic caused considerable damage to international commercial and economic

links. Because of the danger of being drowned, scores of tankers, dry-cargo ships and

fishing vessels have to stay at ports. "This throw-back to colonialism in the South

Atlantic is to be explained by the desire of London and Washington to secure for themselves strong military-strategic positions in an area of the ocean with important sea

lanes," A. Kolodkin said.

CSO:. 5200/2088

25
USSR

BRIEFS

OIL POLLUTION REMEDIES—PM71525 [Editorial Report] Moscow SOVETSKAYA ROSSIYA

in Russian on 23 May carries on page 6 a 900-word V. Tsybulskiy interview

entitled "Helping the Ocean" with Candidate of Technical Sciences M.P. Nesterova, chief of the [presumably Moscow P.P. Shirshov] Oceanology Institute

Analytical Laboratory, on methods and materials currently used or being developed in the Soviet Union to combat the problem of oil pollution at sea. Among

those outlined are a specially-treated perlite which absorbs 20 times its own

weight in oil spillage, a pollution-free method of cleaning out tankers using

an emulsion, oil-consuming bacteria, liquid polyurethane to contain oil slicks,

and dispersants. The interviewee points out that "all the materials developed

in the analytical laboratory have been tested in natural conditions—in the

Baltic and Black Seas. They have been proved harmless to living organisms."

CSO: 5200/2088 END

26