What, then, is the date? Soon? Ever? The nodules lie deep on a near lifeless (and therefore incorruptible) sea bed far outside the widest and wildest claims of territorial jurisdiction-even beyond the reach of the Geneva Convention rules for exploitation of the continental shelf. Since U.S. firms know where the marketable nodules are and have a pretty good handle on the technology required to retrieve and process them, what are they waiting for? They are waiting, say the impatient miners, for the United States government to spell out protective guidelines enabling them to stake out claims large enough and for a tenure long enough to make possible a fair return on the huge investment required. But the United States government, says the more patient State Department, is itself waiting for a set of internationally acceptable guidelines, preferably under the aegis of the United Nations. Which brings up the U.N.'s "Law of the Sea Conference" scheduled for this summer in Caracas, Venezuela. There the collision courses of the "have" and "have not" nations will converge, and they will hopefully hammer out the framework, at least, for the first truly global code of sea law since Hugo Grotius, the 17th century Dutch lawyer, fabricated the historic legal brief which led to the "cannon-shot" rule for territorial waters and the philosophic-legal concept of Mare Liberum, or Freedom of the Seas. Countdown to Caracas Also on the agenda at Caracas, in addition to exploration of sea bed minerals, are use of the sea bed for active and passive military purposes, world fishing rights, limitations on air overflights, commerical shipping, naval operations, oceanographic research, marine pollution and the jurisdiction of coastal states over adjacent waters. Probably the best that can be hoped for in any of these numerous controversial areas is an all-nation agreement or a series of area agreements equally distasteful to all concerned. There are few matters in which amicable agreement will come easy, if at all. The highly charged question of coastal state jurisdiction over adjacent waters provides possibly the best example. Various national positions range from the tenacious U.S. stand for the traditional three-mile limit to the insistence by Latin American states fronting the Pacific on a 200-mile limit that the conference provide them economically important fishing monopolies in offshore currents. There is more involved here than fish, of course. Most states now appear to favor, and many insist on, a twelve-mile territorial zone. But even that small increase would bar free access, via Gibraltar, to the Mediterranean for the United States and to the Atlantic for Russia. And Japan would lose access through the straits of Malacca, vital to her fuel imports, from the Persian Gulf. Many other important straits would be affected. It is no secret that the United States is prepared, however, to accept extension of territorial limits out to 12 miles, provided there are specific exemptions made to guarantee continual rights of free passage through narrow waterways of strategic importance to U.S. military security and vital commercial interests. The United States will probably also agree to even broader "layered" zones in which coastal states would exercise varying degrees of control over fishing, mining, pollution, exploration and treasure hunting-but would not have the right to impede unrestricted passage by ship. It is conceivable, then, that the High Seas with all of its traditional freedoms for just about everything short of piracy will move from three miles out to 200 miles from the continental shores. Sea Bed War in Congress American miners are concerned about how their interests will fare in the trade-offs that probably will have to take place in the smoke-filled committee rooms at Caracas if agreements are to be reached. To strengthen their own bargaining position, and as a hedge against possible prolonged postponement or outright failure of the Caracas Conference, the influential American Mining Congress is pushing a legislative program of its own in the form of two identical bills: H.R. 9-sponsored in the House by Representative Thomas N. Downing (D-Va.), chairman of the House Oceanographic Subcommittee-and S. 1134 --introduced for consideration in the Senate by Senator Lee Metcalf (D-Mont.), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Minerals, Materials and Fuels. The Dorn/Metcalf legislation would authorize the Secre It's All There SINCE the oceans are merely land covered by salt water, geologists agree there is no reason to believe that any of the valuable metals, minerals, and chemicals found on or beneath dry land should stop at the water's edge. There may well be El Dorados beneath the ocean greater than any found on land if for no other reason than that the area is twice as large. U.S. firms already have been working sulfur mines in the Gulf of Mexico, tin mines off the Malay Peninsula; there are workable phosphate deposits on the edges of the continental shelf and aragonite strip mining is underway in the Bahamas. Diamonds have been recovered in quantity off South Africa and gold from the seas off Alaska. The black sands in the U.S. offshore waters are heavy with iron, titanium, zirconium and tungsten. And, of course, the limitless quantities of manganese, copper, nickel and cobalt locked in the manganese nodules are strewn over the ocean floor. tary of the Interior to issue exclusive licenses to American citizens and corporations to stripmine the ocean floor for hard metals in blocked-out areas as large as 40,000 square kilometers (about the size of West Virginia, but to be reduced by 75 per cent for actual commercial operations) and to conduct in-depth mining in much smaller areas. Claims sponsored by "reciprocating states" with comparable legislation would also be recognized. To maintain his claim a licensee would be required to invest substantial development funds on an ascending scale, to maintain continuous commercial recovery once started, to protect the integrity of his working environment, to avoid interference with other ocean users, and to agree to arbitration of disputes. The licensee's investment would be protected by government-administered but miner-financed insurance against outside interference and miners would be reimbursed by the government for any loss due to international regulations agreed to by the United States which would be less favorable than the rights granted under the law. There have been extensive hearings on the bills by both committees. Senator Metcalf, a former judge who believes in hearing all sides of a case, has taken exhaustive testimony from miners, scientists, environmentalists, State and Interior Department officials, and spokesmen for that potent new force in American life, groups of "Concerned Citizens." Congressman Bob Wilson of San Diego, a leading legislative authority on oceanography, is also sponsoring legislation aimed at promoting an immediate climate favorable to deep sea mining on a commercial scale. Manganese nodules on the conveyor belt after discharge from nodule/water separator aboard experimental ocean bottom mining ship DEEPSEA MINER. (Photo by B. J. Nixon, Deepsea Ventures, Inc.) Such informed authorities as Ambassador John R. Stevenson, special representative of the President for the Law of the Sea Conference, and Charles N. Brower, Acting Chairman of the Inter-Agency Task Force on the Law of the Sea, believe the United States is morally bound to foreign unilateral legislation as long as there is a reasonable expectation of a "timely and successful" international agreement. "Timely and successful" means agreed-upon rules no later than summer 1975. They emphasized in their testimony that the United States continues to adhere to President Nixon's position that it is neither necessary nor desirable to halt exploration and exploitation of the sea beds during the negotiating process, provided such activities are subject to the international rules to be agreed upon, which rules should include due protection of the integrity of investment made in the interim period. Less temperate testimony from private groups has characterized the proposed legislation as a miner's land grab which would create a new arena for clashing jurisdictions out of the last truly international area on earth. The most vociferous opponents of independent national or private industry initiatives are the members, perhaps 75 or more, of an informal bloc of developing nations in Asia, Africa and South America who favor an all-powerful international authority to direct all deep sea mining and apportion the income derived from it. This bloc has rallied under a banner which proclaims the deep sea as "the common heritage of mankind." This handsome piece of rhetoric is certain to haunt the halls and resound from the rostrums at Caracas. Meanwhile, the miners wait, spending additional sums for exploration and experimentation until they can secure the protection, national or international, they must have to induce bankers and private investors to help provide the capital-as much as $250 million for a one-unit operationto go into commercial production. Some, with little faith in the Law of the Sea Conference, privately express the hope that the enigmatic billionaire, seemingly independent of outside capital and restraints, will press straight on and that international law will then take shape around a fait accompli as it so often has in the past. Most miners as well as many legislators and leading oceanographers simply hope for reasonably prompt action, national or international, that will make it possible to put U.S. technology to work on a commercially significant scale. They believe that a law could be enacted by Congress flexible enough to provide the necessary security for investment capital now and to be fitted into any all-nations agreement that might come later. If a mineral crisis as serious as the energy crisis already here is to be avoided, say proponents of the current legislation, there can be neither weakness of will nor meanness of spirit. The United States can afford to be generous in cooperation with any international sea-mining body of the future, because there are minerals enough in the ocean for all. What the country cannot afford is to let the opportunity to secure its own future slip away. If responsible private industry gets the regulated backing it needs, metals from the deep sea bed will follow the fishing and underwater oil industries as the third great source of ocean wealth, and may some day, in fact, become number one. SELLING OFF THE "STRATEGIC STOCKPILE" TO FIGHT INFLATION ▪HE ADMINISTRATION spelled out on April 16 its plan for disposing of most-90 per cent-of its "strategic stockpile" of raw materials, as a means of combatting inflation in basic commodities. If Congress goes along as it is expected to, about 6 billion dollars' worth of the stockpiled commodities will be sold over a period of the next several years. "Very useful." The impact on the cost of living is described by Herbert Stein, Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, in this way: "Well, it will be relatively small, but we think it will be very useful.” Asked if the importance of this move on the level of consumers' prices had not been exaggerated, Mr. Stein said: "No, because... this is the kind of thing which does something about prices in the most constructive way; that is, by making more supplies available. "All the other things, which look like critical blows and decisive actions, at best shuffle things around, and at worst, they create shortages and make things worse for the consumer." Of the sales authorized thus far, the biggest are of aluminum, lead and zinc, with about 300 million dollars' worth of those stocks sold, up to last month. Also being sold actively now are rubber, cadmium, bismuth and antimony. But, in relation to demand, the largest stocks being held are those of tin -with about a three-year world supply in the stockpile. Sale of these supplies will require the approval of Congress. The disposal of tin and other commodities would be made over a period of several years, so as not to disrupt world markets or production. Sales that would sharply deflate prices are not intended. No food is included in the strategic stockpiles. Most of the items are metals required by defense industry. Of these, about a one-year requirement is to be retained. Changing defense needs. Behind the plan to dispose of most of the matériel stockpile is a shift in national U. S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, April 30, 1973 [From the Washington Post, Mar. 8, 1974] BAUXITE UNIT SOUGHT BY GUINEA Abidjan, Ivory Coast-Guinean President Ahmed Sekou Toure told representatives of seven leading bauxite exporters yesterday that they must form a pressure group similar to oil producers to expand income from industrial buyers. The meeting in Conarkry, the capital of Guinea, began Tuesday. It is attended by delegations from Guinea, Australia, Guyana, Jamaica, Surinam, (Dutch Guiana), Yugoslavia and Sierra Leone. Sekou Toure said bauxite producers must process their own mineral to become independent of the big buyers who now process bauxite into aluminum elsewhere. His speech was broadcast by Radio Conakry and monitored here. The Guinean president called for an association similar to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, and joint action on prices and production. "We are not plotting against any nation," he said, "but it is not fair that others develop with our resources and to our disadvantage." Guinea is thought to hold a third of the world's bauxite reserves. The major producer represented, though, is Australia-which has called for an association of both exporters and importers, and has opposed one-sided price fixing. [From the Congressional Record, Mar. 4, 1974] LAW OF THE SEA CONFERENCE Mr. PELL. Mr. President, many usually well informed people are unaware, that the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea has actually begun. It was initiated by an organization session held at United Nations Headquarters in New York in December. At the session, partial agreement was reached on the rules of procedure for considering crucial substantive issues at the next meeting of the Conference at Caracas in July and August. The conference is now in an interim but critical period similar to that tricky stage before the starting gun of a sailing race, when the boats are maneuvering for the best position to cross the line. Even though this stage of the conference does not command great public attention, the need for the successful outcome of the conference in resolving urgent issues is of mounting importance. To cite several examples, there is the need to accelerate the exploitation of offshore gas and petroleum resources but not at the expense of significant pollution of ocean space, there is the need of effective coastal state management of fisheries to prevent irreversible depletion of food fish stocks, there is the need of preserving the tradition freedom of civilian and naval navigation. Elizabeth Mann Borgese, to whose splendid work in connection with Pacem in Maribus III I referred in a statement last December, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, December 13, 1973, has recently described how circumstances surrounding these issues have changed so rapidly as to necessitate, in her opinion, revision of the U.S. draft treaty proposed in 1970 for consideration at the Law of the Sea Conference. Essential to the success of the conference is well-informed public and congressional understanding of the basic issues at stake. This is an educational task that both official and public-interest groups are devoting themselves to in a highly commendable fashion. The innovative establishment by the Department of State of the Advisory Committee to the U.S. Law of the Sea Delegation has opened up a unique twoway channel of ideas and information between the executive branch and both the private sector and the Congress. Pacem in Maribus at the Center of the Study of Democratic Institutions has been the source of much creative thinking and public education. Max Stanley's Foundation has contributed enormously to this educative process in a series of seminars on the Law of the Sea. The latest one held in January at Airlie House in conjunction with a useful panel discussion of Members of Congress for Peace through Law, was devoted to informing members of Congress and their staffs of where we stand on the conference and soliciting their views on what we should be doing as we maneuver into place for the starting gun. Knowledgeable writers have also been publishing articles useful in creating wider and clearer appreciation of the essentiality of establishing an orderly regime to assure that ocean space is a lasting source of benefit and harmony for the people of the world. I commend particularly an article by Prof. Richard N. Gardner of Columbia University entitled "It is Time to Consider the Fish's Point of View." Although a teacher of international law, Dick Gardner is not held captive of abstruse legal theory in a statutory tower. He made an outstanding record as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State from 1961 to 1965. He energetically wrestles with the practical problems of our times in his concern for a sane future for mankind. The law of the Sea Advisory Committee is a beneficiary of his membership, which fortunately will also permit him to participate at the Caracas Conference. I ask unanimous consent that "Statement on the Law of the Sea Conference" by Elizabeth Mann Borgese of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions and Professor Gardner's article be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: STATEMENT ON THE LAW OF THE SEA CONFERENCE (By Elisabeth Mann Borgese) "The Conference on the Law of the Sea will take up its substantial work this summer. The outcome of this conference is doubly important. It will determine the fate of the oceans which cover over 70 percent of the earth's surface and on which all life on earth depends. And it may create a new type of international organization apt to enhance development and peace. "The United States has submitted a working paper, UN doc. A/AC 138/25, presenting a Draft U.N. Convention on the International Sea-bed Area. This will be one of the basic working papers for the Conference. When the paper was first submitted, it initiated a new phase of work in the preparation of the Conference. It generated a number of alternative drafts and added both vision and concreteness to the discussions. A number of its features, such as the proposed Ocean Tribunal, are of lasting value. It is to be hoped that they will find their way into the text of the final Treaty. "The U.S. *** on scientific research-which are varying degree of interest to the international community. The revised Fisheries Draft Article (Aug. 1972) is probably the most rational and advanced proposal in this area now before the U.N. "It is my submission, however, that the basic document, A/C 138/25, is obsolete, and that the piece-meal approach to problems which are interdependent and interacting, is inadequate. I would hope the U.S. Government would revise its basic document, extend its function from the management of the seabed and its resources to the management of ocean space and resources, and incorporate its various sectorial or partial proposals in one comprehensive Treaty. "The reason why the basic document A/C 138/25 is obsolete are manifold. Undoubtedly, technology has advanced much faster than anticipated. The fate of the oceans is endangered by a proliferation of such technologies, intensifying traditional uses of ocean space and resources and introducing many new ones. The oceans' living resources whose renewal in the past was keeping pace with artisan methods of fishing, are beginning to fall behind in the race with new industrial methods of exploitation. The maximum sustainable yield is being reached much sooner than had been anticipated even a few years ago. The last few years have registered a decline in the world's total fish catch, and this at a time when the world's population is fast growing and especially the poorer nations depend on the productivity of the oceans for by far the largest part of their animal protein requirements. "Shipping has increased both in size and number of vessels. Freighters and tankers, carrying half a million of deadweight and more, are crowding international waterways and straits. Collisions and groundings are on the order of the day, releasing vast quantities of pollutants into the ocean. Underwater storage tanks and floating superports are built to accommodate this novel kind of maritime traffic. All these installations are prone to accidents, vulnerable to sabotage and, at any rate, designed for a certain percentage of regular loss and waste, accumulating in the oceans as pollution. "We are at the beginning of a revolution in mineral mining in which the oceans are playing an eminent role. Offshore oil production today accounts for about 20 percent of the world's total oil production. It is estimated that this will rise to about 50 percent over the next two decades. The recovery of manganese nodules from the deep ocean floor of the Pacific and the industrial processing of manganese, nickel, cobalt, and other metals in practically unlimited quantities, is just beginning. The ecological consequences of the extraction and processing of these metals are not known at present. |