Skip to main content

Full text of "Worldwide Report: Law of the Sea No. 193"

See other formats

JPRS 80634 

22 April 1982 

Worldwide Report 

No. 193 


JPRS publications contain information primarily from forelegn 
. 7 - : : 1 ~ _ L - } . 2» tien r — — ¢ . -_ -_ 
newspapers, periodica S and DOOKS, Dut also trom news ivency 


transmissions and broadcasts. Materials from fore - eua 
sources are translated; those from English-language sourc 

re transcribed or reprinted, with the original phrasing and 
other characteristics retained. 

Headlines, editorial reports, and material enclosed in brack 
[] 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 

srocessed. Where no processing indicator is given, the infor 
mation was summarized or extracted. 

Unfamiliar names rendered phonetically or transliterated are 
enclosed in parentheses. Words or names preceded by a ques- 
tion mark and enclosed in parentheses were not clear in th 
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 poli- 
cies, views or attitudes of the U.S. Government. 


JPRS publications may be ordered from the National Technical 
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161. In order- 
ing, 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. 

Correspondence pertaining to matters other than procurement 
may be addressed to Joint Publications Research Service, 
1000 North Glebe Road, Arlington, Virginia 22201. 

JPRS 80634 

22 April 1982 


No, 193 



Foreign Boats Not Filling New Zealand Finfish Quotas 

Ce PUR. 5 Wow GR) nao 0k 66-6 646556400604505046504804005 1 
Seminar Calls for Exploitation of Sea Resources 
(THE BANGLADESH OBSERVER, 12 Mar 82) .......sceeeceeeees 2 
Plans To Increase Sea Fish Catch Lauded 
(Editorial; THE SUNDAY STATESMAN, 14 Mar 82) ........... 3 
Tanker for Smuggling Seized 4 

Law of Sea Developments Assessed 
(Various sources, various dates) ........... boeeeeeueenes 5 

Criticism of U.S. Position, J. Symonides Interview 
Economic Consequences, by Leszek Sobczak 

-ae- [III - WW - 136] 


Coast Guard Protects Territorial Limit, Controls Pollution 
(Trevor Adams; SUNDAY ADVOCATE-NEWS, 7 Mar 82) .......... 12 
Scientific Search With USSR in Exclusive Economic Zone 
(MAR Y PESCA, Dec 81) ......... PUTT TTTEeT TT CTT TT Te ree 14 
Agreements With Various Countries Studied 
(JORNAL DE ANGOLA, 7 Mar 82) ....cccccccccccccccecccccess 15 
More Severe Sentence for South African Boat 
Ceca, Se WE GEE 066066606 600566660000006006058006845> 16 

Commentator Sees New Law of Sea Benefiting Country 
(Oscar Ede; Lagos Domestic Service, 29 Mar 82) .......... 18 

Bonn Set Course for Separate Treaty on Maritime Mining 
CBGR GPIMGEL, 15 Wee GE) covcccccsvcececsccsccscvessseces 20 



Christchurch THE PRESS in English 3 Mar 82 p 5 

{Text ] PA 



Foreign fishing boats have 
taken much less than their 
quota of finfish this year, and 
little of the season remains. 

By mid-February, Russian 
foreign-licensed boats had 
taken little more than a 
quarter of their quota for the 
year ending March 31, ac- 
cording to the Ministry of 
Agriculture and Fisheries. 

Japan had taken oniy 29 
per cent, and South Korea 
had taken only 58 per cent of 
its small allocation 

The low catches are a 
boon to New Zealand, be- 
cause they do not affect its 
earnings from foreign fish 
heences and also help. pre- 
serve fish stocks 

Russian boats, which are 
restricted to the storm 
waters of fishing area 
south of the South Isiand, had 
caught only 9000 tonnes of 

their total yearly of 
32,500 tonnes, said he Fis». 
eries Management Division's 
assistant director, Mr Tom 

This was 5000 tonnes less 
than at the same tyme last 

Japan had taken about 
19, tonnes of its total 
quota of 66,000 tonnes. com- 
pared with 24,000 tonnes at 
the same time last year, Mr 
Norris said 

South Korea has a small 
allocation of only 2300 tonnes 


a year, and by mid-February 
had taken about 1300 tonnes. 

The reasons for the low 
catch were varied, including 
fewer boats, difficulties in 
finding fish, poor weather, 
and mechanical problems, 
said Mr Norris. .. 

“But the lower catch does 
not affect New Zealand's 
earnings at all. It is almost a 
boon to New Zealand be- 
cause presumably the fish 
they don't catch will be 
availabie next year.” 

The foreign licensed boats 
pay a fixed amount for every 
tonne of fish they are allo- 
cated — 3 fee must pay 
regerdi-ss of actual 

New Zealand's earnings 
from the licence fees this 
year will be about $550,000 
from Russia, $13 million 
from Japan, and $53,000 from 
South Korea. 

Foreign licensed boats fish 
for lower-valued species such 
as barracouta, ling, and 
southern blue whiting They 
have virtually no access to 
higher-valued species such as 
Orange roughy, the prime 
species taken by joint ven- 

Joint ventures have ex- 
hausted their total quota of 
higher valued finfish species 
outside the inhospitable area 
E, and are now fishing for 


Dacca THE BANGLADESH OBSERVER in English 12 Mar 82 pp l, 12 

(text] The two-day national semir.r on marine fisheries development in 
Bangladesh concluded in Dacca on Thursday with a number of recommendations 
to exploit the sea resources to the maximum level, reports BSS. 

Spread over four technical sessions, the two-day seminar recommended for 
doubling the present production without depleting the stock, 

It also emphasised for more intensive survey particularly pelagic resources 
as well as other non-conventional varieties like deep sea lobsters, deep sea 
shrimps, squids and cuttle-fishes, The seminar besides other recommenda- 
tions, suggested for giving preference to joint venture programmes for 
exploitation and utilisation of varieties other than coastal marine shrimps, 
keeping in mind the national interest, 

This would bring in quick transfer of technologies in exploitation and 
utilisation of pelagic fish resources and non-conventional items, the 
seminar suggested. 

Addressing the afternoon session on Thursday, State Minister for Forests, 
Fisheries and Livestock Mr Amirul Islam Kaiam, said that a schem had been 
undertaken to bring one lakh acres of land in coastal belt under shrimp 

He called upon the scientists and experts to find out ways and means to 
exploit the fish resources of the Bay of Bengal and utilise them for 
development of the national economy, Mr Kalam also cautioned the concerned 
agencies not to go for wver-fishing which might damage the existing fishing 

The concluding session was presided over by Mr M.E. Anwar, Secretary, 
Ministry of Forests, Fisheries and Livestock, 

The seminar also suggested moderate expansion of trawler fleet to a level 
of approximately double the present harvest, further introduction of traw- 
lers and fishing boats, diversification of fishing technology both in small 
scale and deep-sea fishing and standardisation of existing trawlers. 

It also emphasised the demarcation of fishing zone between small-scale and 
deep-sea operation. 

CSO: 5000/7032 


Calcutta THE SUNDAY STATESMAN in English 14 Mar 82 p 6 



Tue plans reportedly prepar- 
ed by the Central Marine Fi- 
sheries Research Institute to 
increase the countiy’s sea fish 
catch from the present 1.4 mil- 
lion tons to 3.5 million tons by 
the end of the Sixth Plan are 
welcome at a time when the 
fishing industry is in the dol- 
drums. The enthusiasm notice- 
able five or six years ago seems 
to have waned. A spokesman 
of the Association of Indian 
Fishery Industries, mainly re- 

ting large commercial 
ouses, recently complained 
that they were unable to com- 
pete in the world market be- 
cause of two factors: a steep 
rise In operating costs because 
of increasing dicsel prices and 
Stagnation in the prices of 
shrimps, which account for 
87% of the earnings from fish 
exports. The rise in the cost of 
trawlers from Rs 45 lakhs two 
yexrs ago to about Rs 70 lakhs 
now has also inhibited the en- 
trepreneurs. There is said to 
have been no investment In 
recent years, and several well- 
known companies have opted 
out of the enterprise. To make 
things worse, shrimp catches 
have fallen, apparently  obe- 
cause of wrong fishing me- 
thods. The practice of dragging 
heavy weights along the sea- 
bed to force prawns out of 
their natural habital may lead 
to a temporary increase In cat- 

ches, but the vield. it is said, 

would ullimately fall because 
of indiscriminate destruction 
of breeding grounds. This is 
reported to have happened in 

CSO: $200/7031 

seas near Thailand, which per- 
haps explains why Thai traw- 
lers are being increasingly 
found poaching in the Bay of 

The decline in shrimp cat- 
ches in Indian waters have 
forced seagoing trawlers to 
turn more and more to the tra- 
ditional fishing grounds of 
smaller fishermen, often pro- 
voking unpleasant skirmishes. 
It has been suggested that the 
bigger operators should be di- 
verted from shrimps to other 
varieties of fish: but enough 
trawlers are not available for 
exploration. nor is enough 
known about new fishin 
grounds fo encourage suc 
ventures. In fact. 20 new traw- 
lers bemg imported are only 
suitable for catching shrimps. 
The country has now a total of 
only 57 trawlers against 7,000 
in Taiwan and nearly twice 
that number in Japan. Of these 
57, only seven are said to be 
capable of deep sea fishing; the 
others tend to stay close to the 
coast. Various measures, like 
soft loans tu encourage entre- 
preneurs, have been proposed, 
while the Fisheries Research 
Inslitule has drawn up plans 
fo help smal! fishermen buy 
boats or modernize them. The 
latter emphasis. of course, is 
not mi<vlaced, because it is the 
six million fishermen using 
traditiona| calamarans as well 
as mechanized boats who ac- 
count for nearly 65° of the 
catches. Yet most of them live 
in poverty and al the mercy 
of middlemen. 




TANKER FOR SMUGGLING SEIZED--The Indonesian customs and excise patrol boat 
3007 this morning intercepted a 1,000-ton tanker flying the Panamanian fie; 
which was about to unload smuggled goods worth nearly 1 billion rupiah north 
of Merak [Wect Java]. The tanker was sailing slowly at dawn off (Tanggalan) 
Cape, North Merak, thus attracting the attention of the customs patrol boat, 
which left Tanjungpriok Port, Jakarta, yesterday on patrol duty. After 
investigating the tanker’s documents, it was found that the tanker had no 
permit to enter Indonesian waters. The documents only showed that the tanker, 
which came from Singapore, was to head for Miri in Sarawak. The director 
general of the customs and excise service this afternoon ordered the commander 
of the Indonesian customs and excise patrol unit to tow the tanker to 
Tanjungpriok Port. [Text] [BK280408 Jakarta Domestic Service in Indonesian 

1200 GMT 27 Mar 82] 

CSO: 5200/5644 



Criticism of U.S. Position 

Warsaw TRYBUNA LUDU in Polish 9 Mar 82 p 6 

[Interview with Prof Dr J. Symonides, director of the Polish Institute of 
International Affairs; date and place not specified] 

[Text] The llth Session of the Third Conference of the 
Law of the Sea was convened in New York on 8 March. 
Enduring since 1973, the work of the conference was 
supposed to be completed last year at the 10th Session 
in Geneva. The formal signing of the Convention of the 
Law of the Sea is supposed to take place in Caracas in 
September of this year. A represuntative of TRYBUNA 
LUDU asks Prof Dr J. Symonides, wiio participa*ed in 

the work of the conference on behalf of Poland, a 
number of pertinent questions. 

[Question] Why has the conference lasted so long? 

[Answer] According to the definitive program prepared during the 10th Session, 
the next session--the llth--is supposed to be the last one. It is assumed 
that the conference will be in session from 8 March to 30 April in accordance 
with the detail five-stage program which is supposed to lead to the acceptance 
of the convention. In principle, all the important issues which were the 
subject of negotiations at the Third Conference of the Law of the Sea were 
resolved. Only two matters remain unresolved: the question of the participa- 
tion of international organizations and national liberation movements in the 
coming convention, and the question of the preparatory commission which is 
supposed to make preparations to initiate work on the future Organization for 
the Seabed when the conference is finished. 

The question of the participation of international organizetions does not 
evoke great rese:vations. However, many differences of opinions of a political 
nature crop up ccncerning the participation in the convention of national 
liberation movemects. The developing countries (the so-called Group of 77), 
which represent a decisive wajority of the conference attendees (over 120) and 
the socialist countries support the solution anticipating the perticipation 

of the national liberation movements, but the Western countries, especially 
the United States, as indicated in information published in the American 
press at the end of January, are registering reservations against such a 
possibility. Editorial work on the text of the convention is a completely 
separate issue and remains unfinished. 

The mos. important question, however, which can have a bearing on the results 
of the llth Session, is the attitude of the United States toward the results 
to date of the Third Conference of the Law of the Sea. Im 1981, the American 
administration reviewed its previous approach to the fundamental and already 
agreed to portions of the draft convention conceraing the principles of 
exploiting seabeds beyond national boundaries of jurisdiction. Thus, the 
concern here is about those seabed regions that represent the so-called commun 
heritage of mankind. Washington has stipulated that the convention would not 
be ratified by the Senate if the accepted system of exploitation and research 
as well as resolutions concerning the structure and system of voting in the 
future Organization for the Seabed endanger the parochial interests of the 
United States. Among other things, the concern here is about establishing 
production limits, about obligatory transfer of technology, and that greater 
exploitation authorization and facilitation are assumed for enterprises of 

the Organization for the Seabed as opposed to private American and other firms. 
The United States argues that this will impact economic results and competition 
and at the same time discourage private capital from investing. 

As a sideline to the entire package of American reservations, it should be 
stated that u» to now the American delegation not only participated in working 
out all solutions but many of them were placed into practice simply on its 
initiatives. These solutions do not represent propositions of a single group 
of nations. At least some of them are unsatisfcctory to the developiny 
countries, in miny instances this also concerns the socialist countries. 

However, the assumption was accepted that all of these controversial and 
complicated questions concerning the seabed, navigation, the continental shelf, 
investigating and protecting the sea environment, and so forth can be resolved 
by compromise but only within the framework of the so-called package. The 
issuance of reservation in the final stage of the conference was received with 
much criticism by a vast majority of the conference attendees, which they al- 
ready expressed at the 10th Session. Among other things, it was considered to 
be disdainful of international society and its interests, that it viclated 
good negotiation practices, especially the principle of devolution in inter- 
national negotiations. If the United States submits too many amendments that 
are far-reaching, then their thorough negotiation at the llth session can turn 
out to be unrealistic. In this situation, the international community will 

be confronted with the problem of deciding whether to accept the convention 
without the participation of the United States. Thie will have a definite 
negative effect on international cooperation, but it is possible that no other 
solution will be possible. 

[Question] What role is being played by t's socialist countries, including 
Poland, in the conference? What is their position? 

[Answer] The socialist countries are active advocates for finishing the work 
and accepting the convention by way of consensus. This has been their position 
for a long time. At the 10th Session, our countries consistently collaborated 
with the Group of 77; unfortunately we were unable to achieve our goal. 

x. The socialist countries have taken the position that the many compiicated 
questions concerning the principles and means of using the oceans and seas can 
be settled only br way of cc=rromises which take into account the interests 
of the eu.cire international commmity. Thus they have supported and put for- 
ward many compromise proposals for resolving the problems associated with the 
future Organization for the Seabed. They also emphasize the great importance 
of mandatory freedom of navigation in the new Law of the Sea. The socialist 

/ countries consistently emphasize the significance of accepting the Convention 
of the Law of the Sea without which the World Ocean can become an arena of 
confrontation, coafiicts and unilateral claims. 

[Question] How can one evaluate the revocation of Poland's permit to fish in 
the economic zone of the United States in the context of the draft convention 
of the Law of the 5ea? 

[Answer] Concerning the question of access to the livs resources of an 
economic zone, it should be st*ted that the convention acknowledges the right 
of a coastal state to regulate these rvssources. If, however. a so-called 
surplus exists in an economic zone because the coastal country does not harvest 
the quota of fish that could be harvested without damaging the so-called 
schools of fish. then that quota should be made available to other countries. 
The convention emphasizes very clearly the obligation of making this quota 
available to other countries. 

Regarding the question as to who can claim a portion of this surplus, Articls 
62 of the draft convention states that a coastal country should consider the 
necessity of lessening the negative economic effects for those countries who 
traditionally fished in these regions and who contributed important work in 

investigating and identifying resources. Poland fulfills thvse requirements. 

A second consideration by which coastal countries should be guided results 
from Article 70 of the convention. The convention anticipates that "a nation 
having a geographically disadvantageous location” has a specific right to 
participate in the exploitation »f appropriate portions of a surplus. Poland 
is such a country because we cannot establish a full 200-mile economic zone 
in the Baltic Sea, and our geographical location means that satisfying the 
food needs of our people requires access to the economic zones of other 
nations. Thus in the light of the provisions of the drart convention, 
Washington's decision to revoke our fishing agreement violates our justified 
claims based on two rights. ithout a basic change of circumstances from the 
viewooint of international law, it thus represents a unilateral abbrogation 
of the agreement to make quotas available. 

Economic Consequences 
Warsaw GOSPODARKA PLANOWA in Polish No 10, Jct 81 pp 477-478 

[Article by Leszek Sobczak: "The Economic Consequences of the New Convention 
on the Law of the Sea”] 

[Text] The Third Conference of the Law of the Sea has been laboring for the 
past 7 years (with some breaks) to create a new legal order on the seas. The 
fruit of their labors is the unofficial draft convention on the Law of the Sea 
which will probably undergo very little shange during the course of forth- 
coming negotiations. 

In evaluating the results to date of the above conference, which were pre- 
sented in the 1980 UN Activities Report, Se< ‘etary General Kurt Waldheim 
stated that they were the most significant international achievement s‘nce 
the UN Charte, was ratified, and he expressed the hope that the convention 
would be ratified in 1981. 

In conjunctiun with this the question arises: What will change the new con- 
vention on the Law of the Sea? Above all, our national interests concern the 
resolutions abcut navigation and fishing. These two areas, though they differ 
significantly, were unexpectedly linked with the claims of coastal states to 
have exclusive rights to exploit the resources of the seas. 

After World War II, some Latin American courcries began to claim a 200-mile 
territorial sea. In truth, however, these claims were not recognized by 
other countries, but the emergence of the idea of yielding to coastal states 
sovereignty over a 200-mile sea zone was the spark that did not die out but 
smouldered for a long time, bursting into flames in the 1970s. Other nations, 
who freed themselves from colonial rule and who wanted to liberate themselves 
as quickly as possible from poverty and backwardness, took up the idea. As 
one of the possible ways of accelerating their development, they claimed the 
resources of the seas bordering their shores, and not only within the narrow 
3-, 6-, or even 12-mile sea zcne*. 

During the 1971-1972 period, the African countries demanded that their rights 
to live and mineral resources in the 200-mile economic zone be recognized. 

At the same time the countries of the Caribbean Sea Basin passed a declaration 
calling for the establishment of a 200-mile patrimonial sea zoue. 

These new demands were a real shock to those who were accustomed to the 
traditional principles of international law according to which neither 
territorial seas nor an exclusive fishing zone can extend beyond 12 nautical 
miles from a shore. Beyond such a territorial sea, the open sea unfurls to 

1. Based on the draft convention on the Law of the Sea and other published 
materials from the 10 sessions to date of the Third Conference of the 
Law of the Sea. 

{ territorial sea is a part of the territory of a coastal state. Foreign 
ships are entitled only to the right of safe passage. Many countries, 
including Poland, do not recognize such a right to warships. Foreign aircraft 
cannot fly over territorial seas without the approval of the coastal state. 

In this area, there is no freedom to fish or conduct scientific research. 

A real fear existed that unless an agreement were reached regulating economic 
zones, then they would be established in the form of territorial seas. The 
acceptance of this alternative would be a mortal blow to international naviga- 
tion, especially since, at the same time, attempts are being made, under the 
pretext of protecting the environment, to impose on foreign ships unilateral 
requirements concerning the construction of ships, their equipment and crews. 

In this complicated situation, the Third Conference of the Law of the Sea was 
called to find a reasonable compromise. 

From the very start, the conference took place in an atmosphere of dogged 
combat among the so-called territorialists who wanted to expand territorial 
seas to 200 nautical miles, and the remaining countries who agreed to recognize 
economic zones under certain conditions; they vigorously defended the freedom 
of navigation. The Polish delegation defended our national interests and the 
realistic needs of the entire international community. 

During the initial phase of the conference some developing countries were not 
aware of the relationship existing between the freedom of navigation and their 
own economic development. As is known, no nation can manage without inter- 
national trade, and to a great extent this trade depends on the transport of 
goods on sees. 

During the course of many years of arduous negotiations, arguments and con- 
sistent convictions, the freedom of navigation remained intact. It can be 
said without any exaggeration that this is an histor/c victory for the entire 
international community to which the Polish delegation also contributed. 

The rules iimiting territorial seas to 12 miles were accepted. The right of 
all boats, ships and aircraft to unconstrained passage through a strait 
serving international navigation was guaranteed. The freedom of passage 
through the waters of archipelago states was also assured, making it possible 
for Polish ships to continue to sail without interference, for example, 
through the waters of Indonesia. The legal status of an economic zone was 
framed in such a way so ase not to limit freedom of navigation. 

An economic zone does not represent territorial waters of a country, but it 
is an area of open sea up to 200 miles wide on which a coastal state is 
entitled to exclusive fishing and certain other narrowly defined rights. 
Foreign nations can continue to take advantage of the freedom of navigation 
and flight, and the laying of undersea cables and pipelines. 

2. Navigare necesse est--navigation is a necessity! This is a fact and not 
a well-worn slogan. 

A consequence of acknowledging to a coastal state the exclusive right to 
exploit living resources is the cancellation of the freedom to fish on about 
36 percent of the total sea area on which about 95 percent of all fish are 
caught; about 60 percent of the world tuna catch comes from fishing grounds 
included in these zones. 

However, a coastal state cannot act completely independently relative to the 
live resources in its economic zone. The draft convention of the law of the 
sea requires that they manage these resources as effectively as possible (by 
applying the results of research and by cooperating with appropriate inter- 

national organizations to protect these resources against overfishing and to 
maintain the species of fish that are caught at a level guaranteeing a con- 

stant, optimal output. 

The coastal states are obligated to specify the completely allowable fish 
catch, to establish its own fishing capacity and to permit the surplus to be 
caught by foreign fishermen based on appropriate international agreements. 
The goal of these resolutions is to guarantee that all fish that can be 
caught within the framework of rational management can be caught. ‘he world 
suffers from a lack of protein and cannot allow its waste by leaving fish in 
the sea which in time must die. 

For many years the question of access to a surplus was the subject of sharp 
controversy in the line of division between the developed and developing 
countries was not at all sharp. The realization of the concept of an economic 
zone benefited above all those nations who possess extensive coasts bounded 

by waters rich in fish. Rich countries like the United States, Canada, 
Austrailia, Japan and New Zealand have such extensive zones. However, nations 
having especially disadvantageous locations lost out, that is, countries who 
in general cannot establish a zone or a zone that is small and contains in- 
sufficient resources to satisfy the food needs of its own people. Poland, 
among others, which is situated on a small, semiclosed sea with limited 

living resources, is such a country. 

Poland's position regarding economic zones was presented at the Second Session 
of the conference which was held in Caracas in 1974. In expressing its 
willingness to recognize the rights of coastal states to establish economic 
zones, the chairman of the Polish delegation, the then vice minister of foreign 
affairs, S. Trepczynski, insisted in his speech that proper consideration be 
accorded to the needs of countries that can only overcome difficulties result- 
ing from geographically disadvantageous locations by expanding deep-sea 
fishing. Poland's deep-sea fishing industry arose after the war and expanded 
dynamically. Polish fishing ships not only are at home on many distant 
fishing grounds but also contributed important work in investigating and 
identifying schools of fish. 

To a certain extent, these facts have been taken into account in the draft 
convention as well as in legislation passed by some countries. For example, 
a 1976 U.S. law on fishing allowed certain priviliges for those countries 
whose ships traditionally fished in areas within these zones. 


The question of access to the living resources of economic zones has not yet 
been completely settled; however, there is no hope for great changes in the 
draft convention. Privileges in fishing areas will serve only the developing 
countries, especially inland countries and those having geographically dis- 
advantageous locations. The rights of developed countries having geograph- 
ically disadvantageous locations, such as Poland, unfortunately were limited 
to the economic zones of the developed countries located in the same region. 
However, one cannot make use of these rights relative to developed countries 
whose economies depend on fishing to a large extent. 

Of great significance in realizing our interests are the adequately extensive 
establishment of the concept of a "region" as well as the acceptance of the 
resolution which does now exist that a country with a geographically disad- 
vantageous location should have the right to fish in the economic zones of a 
neighboring region if in a given region there is no surplus. 

If one was to honestly evaluate Poland's present situation, then our fishing 
industry cannot be considered for some kind of specific privilege in accessing 
the living resources of foreign zones. Fishing can be done in these zones 

but only on the basis of agreements with the coastal states concluded as 

usual on the basis of commercial principles. The extent of the access and the 
conditions under which we will be able to make use of the right to fish will 
depend on the knowledge, experience and cleverness of our negotiators. 

In the new situation wherein easy access to fishing grounds has ended, the 

proper use of the Baltic's resources becomes a vital necessity. Of course, 
we have our own zone on this sea and we also participate in well-developed 

international cooperation in the fields of fishing and protecting resources 
within the framework of the Gdansk Convention of 1973 as well as bilateral 


cso: 5200/3001 




Bridgetown SUNDAY ADVOCATE-NEWS in English 7 Mar 82 p 15 

[Article by Trevor Adams] 

[Excerpts } 

- BARBADOS is continui 
ws development drive a 
gearing to bolster the 
economy by securing 
territorial and economic zone. 
- Declaration of the standard 
200-mile economic zone by the 
-countries in the Latin America 
‘and Caribbean region, was a 
contributor to the demise of 
the a shrimping and 
deep-sea fishing industry. 

. Barbados is similarly en- 
suring that no other country 
takes from this 166-square 
mile nation’s share of 
whatever marine mineral 
resources and sea food is 
available in its own economic 
zone of the standard 200 miles. 
Theoretically, no one can fish 
or mine here without 
mission of the Barbados 
Government. However, 
special arrangements were 
necessary between this 
eountry and the Governments 
of St. Vincent, St Lueia 
Grenada, Trinidad and 
Tobago, and Martinique. 
They are between only 90 and 
120 miles away from Bar- 

» The established national 
mar. time guardian over the 12 
mile t lal limit around 
Barbados and its economic 
zone is the Barbados Coast 

arm of the Barbados Defence 

Military protection § is 
essential not only in the battle 
for economic survival but also 
to maintain safety at sea and 

for the ation of the 
lives of 2000 or more Bar- 
badian fishermen, tourists. 
whose numbers and foreign 
currency are a main in 

fragile economies. The latter 
characteristic, however, also 
applies to Barbados whose 
economy is precariously 
hed on the tripod formed 
rom tourism, sugar and 
manufacturers in that order. 
And the st peetioms faring 
deve t acing 
this isiand are magnified by 
uncertain prices for the few 
primary products which are 
exported, declines in earnings 
Trom tourism, dwindling 
foreign investment, higher 
energy costs and global 
_ Imports always outstrip 
Pxports and this unbalanced 
trading out of Barbados’ 
Javour puts a deep dznt in 

foreign exchange particularly 
When there are chortfalls in 
any two sectors. The oi! and 
Tood bills are the principal 
eroders as shown in the 
January to October, 1981 of- 
ficial trade . 

The nation’s total food 

ote for the cost 
136.3 million. Fish imports 
accounted for $6.9 million of 


the bill. Oil prices continued to 
late rapidly and saddled 
with a $162.7 million 

un cnpaelly one that this will 

Ticials stressed that this 
“revolution” in (ishing costs 
hundreds of 

boat owners 
thousands of dollars to buy the 
vessels and equi . in 

living off the bottom as 
against those feeding on the 
sea surface, the officials 

nal 's also ee Bar- 
tan geologists a 

officials that there is the 
possibility of minerals on and 
under the seabed. These in- 

Against this background 
and investment, the Barbados 

Government has responded to 
an obvious obligation of coast 
watching and rescue of 

persons in distress at sea 
—_ os island's coasts. 
They ve provided a Coast 
Guard base, HMBS Wil - 
by Fort — located at 
—. — and een vessels. 

ence ing was 
imanced entirely r con- 
cessionary loan from the 
British overnment, in a 
fechage contracted to Brooke 
Marine of Lowestoft i 
— the designers and builders 
of the Coast Guard's flagship, 
HMBS Trident. 

A deterrent 

In the present climate of 
economic recession, the Coast 
Guard not only places em- 
phasis on giving quick 
assistance to Barbadian 
fishermen lost at sea and in 
emergencies involving tourist 
yachting and wind-surfing, 
but this efficient unit also ac 
as a deterrent to fishing 
vessels coming into the 
island's economic zone, and 
drug traffickers. 

Head of the Coast 
Guard, Lieutenant Com- 
mander James Oliver, em- 

CSO: 5200/7523 

phasised the vital importance 

of — prover military 
ection in { areas: 
“The fact is that we are 
around and we wii) be seen to 
be around; and thai actually 
affects this." 
"i ~ k— 
0 iscipli people in 
uniform oa boats at night, 

mongst a bus ———y 
yachts where perhaps é 

of drug trafficking or 
remote beaches, if roy 
Guard vessels are visible anc 
ca out random patrols 

think twice. 
” are not sure what you 
are ing for, whether 
have noticed them and so t 

pout their approach to this 
about ra o 
island — in fact tc the extent 
that we may deter the 
totally. It is a question of being 
seen on random business — 
like patrols that will actually 
benefit the country in those 
— uard Chief 

The Barbados Coast Guard 
Services will be able to handie 
oil pollution. Close to shore or 
the coast, oil pollution can be 
disastrous to the immediate 
area; environmental damage 
is more severe. The potential 
for oil pollution has increased 
dramatically due to the 
enormous rise in tran- 
sportation of oil by ships and 
the great increase in the 
number and size of the ships 
themsel\ es 



Havana MAR Y PESCa in Spanish Dec 81 p 2 

[Text] As part of the cooperation agreement between the Academy of Sciences of Cuba 
and the Soviet Academy of Sciences, there was a joint expedition of their oceanology 
specialists on the ship "Academico Mitislav Keldish" recently. Academician Vitale 
Boitov headed the expedition. 

The Cuban scientific collective included Dr Otmara Abello, doctoral candidate in 
sciences, and engineer Leopoldo Blazquez and engineer Jorge Foro, specialists in 
marine geology and physics. 

The trip began in Havana Bay, continued to the Yucatan Channel area, the southern 
coast of Cuba to Cienfuegos Bay, the Golfo de Cazones, Cienaga de Zapata and finally 
back to Cienfuegos. 

During the 12 days of on-board research, the Cuban scientists basically studied the 
areas with fishing importance for our country. The studies included marine physics, 
marine geology, etc. 

First trip made by the "Academico Mitislav Keldish" research ship in waters of 

the exclusive economic zone of Cuba 
As is established in the bilateral pact between the Cuban and Soviet Academies of 

Sciences, this trip opens the way for other joint expeditions with scientific 

cso: 3010 


Luanda JORNAL DE ANGOLA in Portuguese 7 Mar 82 p l 

[Text] A source close to the Ministry of Fisheries told ANGOP [Angolan Press 
Agency] that iack of cadres and technical means prevent Angola from immediately 
joining the programs in the field of fisheries recommended by the third 

meeting of the countries coordinators of the Program of Action of the Movement 
of Nonaligned Countries in April of last year in Havana (Cuba). 

That meeting approved several documents aimed at cooperation and development 
of fishing activities among members of the Movement of Nonaligned Countries, 
stressing the recommendations of consultations of fishing on the high seas, 
building of ships, exchange of fishing information and establishment of 
groups of experts. 

Meanwhile, as the source revealed, Angoi* contemplates the purchase, within 
a short time, of 20 ferroconcrete ships from Cuba, as well as cooperation 
with Nigeria for the creation of a joint firm in Cabinda Province. 

At this time, according to the same source, exchange of experiences in the 
fishing area continues with Mozambique, there is a protocol of interests with 
Libya, and ways for Angola to grant licenses for fishing will be studied 

with Congolese firms connected with fishing. Aso within the framework of 
nonaligned countries, a Nigerian ship "Ibru" is fishing, experimentally, in 
territorial waters of the People's Republic of Angola. 

CSO: 5200/5642 



Maputo NOTICIAS in Portuguese 18 Mar 82 p 10 

[Text] The Superior Appeals Court of the People’s iepublic of Mozambique has 
decided to increase the penalty imposed on Willy Bansen, the captain of the 
South African fishing boat "Hawk" DNA19. Last month he was intercepted in 
Mozambican territorial waters carrying a ton of fish, according to a report 
issued by the AIM [Mozambique Information Agency], citing sources of that 
higher court. 

According to the same source, in the sentence which was announced the day 
before yesterday, thz court ordered the confiscation of the vessel with all 
equipment, and sentenced Willy Hansen, a Danish national, to a fine of 800,000 
meticals (about 22,000 rands) in freely convertible currency, and to 10,500 
meticals in court expenses. 

Thus, the sentence of the Maputo Maritime Court, which had tried and sentenced 
Willy Hansen to a fire of only 800 meticals, was annulled. 

The suspension of the first sentence was requested by the Attorney General of 
the Republic on the basis of manifest illegality, resulting from total lack 

of application of the penalty provided for in the law approved by the People's 
Assembly in 1978. 

The law provides for penalties ranging from 750,000 to 10 million meticals 

in case the violation was limited to jurisdictional waters, and confiscation 
of the vessel if it is proven that it was fishing, preparing for fishing or 
transhipping fishing products in territorial waters without due authorization. 

After reviewing the entire process, including the depositions of witnesses 

and of Willy Hansen himself, it was considered that there had been preparations 
for fishing in territorial waters, which fact had rot been taken into 
consideration by the Maputo Maritime Court. 

As a matter of face, writes AIM, in these depositions it was stated that the 
vessel had been fishing on 7 February in Zavora, Inhambane Province, and was 
again preparing lines for another fishing day. 


When the ship was intercepted on 8 February, 1.6 miles from the coast near 
Ponta Dobela, Maputo Province, the fishing rods were ready, with bait on 
the hooks. 

It was also proven that the ship often fishes in Mozambican waters, mainly 
in the areas of Ponta de Ouro, Monte Belo and Boa Paz. Hansen even admitted 
that they fished in Mozambican waters, but that he was convinced that the 
supervision was not effective. 

The Superior Appeals Court also considered the loss, in favor of the State of 
Mozambique, of the value of the fish found aboard, which was evaluated at 
some 70,000 meticals. 

CSO: 4$200/5642 



AB291340 Lagos Domestic Service in English 0600 GMI 29 Mar 82 
[Commentary by Oscar Ede] 

[Text] Today, the world awaits a new international law of the sea to replace 
the old one contained in the four Geneva conventions of 1958. The tough 
bargaining between 150 states which started since December 1963 is yet to 
materialize into a permanent test treaty. The emerging law is in many ways 
significantly different from the old law. Admittedly, the journey to this 
point has been rough as the developed countries whose interests predominate 
in the old law of the sea find it difficult to accept the need for equality, 
peace and justice for the sea. But on the other hand, the developing countries 
are equally determined to create a new legal order. The irony in the current 
conference is that alliances have not been iormed among negotiating states 
along traditional, ideological liberal and socialist or capitalist and 
communist lines. 

Instead, alliances have been on a national level of development line--the 
underdeveloped versus the developed. Because of the increase in the resources 
of the sea, major industrial countries have suddenly developed strange 
(?demands) themselves in opposition to the poor countries of the world who 
constitute over 3/4 of the negotiating states. In the present conference, 
about 115 (?subjects) were listed for negotiations. The major issue centered 
around who owns and controls what parts of the world oceans and seas as well 
as the living and non-living resources of these oceas«. The conference will 
also define the rights and duties of other states, no.ably, the land-locked 
and geographically disadvantaged states in the different areas of the world's 
oceans. [Passage indistinct] The remaining issues mainly concern voting 
procedure and methods of granting exploration license in the international 
seabed areas. This part has been holding bach the emergence of a new law 

of the sea. It is these same issues that led ‘o the stalemate at the last 
conference. The United States Government has isked for time to review the 
draft agreement, especially as it concerns the area on the mining of the 
seabed. But the majority of delegates felt that this could reopen old 
arguments and thereby delay the final agreement. The present arrangement 
recognizes two distinct areas: The national area comprising the 321-kilometer 
exclusive economic zone, EEZ, and the international area comprising areas 
outward of the EEZ. 


The area is known as the common heritage of mankind and it is to be managed 
by an international seabed authority. This second area has generated problems 
due to the reluctance of the industrialized world, which has vast technology, 
resulting in the problem of granting concession or exploration license to 
multinational corporations. However, issues have been almost resolved in 

the national areas, that is, the exclusive economic zone. The rights and 
duties of states, both coastal and land-locked, in other states have been 
resolved particularly as they relate to exploitation, preservation, research 
and other basic freedoms on the sea. 

One major breakthrough in the new law is the adoption of a breadth of 19 
kilometers for the territorial sea. Thie issue had eluded all conferences 
organized since the beginning of this century. 

What therefore are the implications of these developments for Nigeria? Like 
every other coastal state, Nigeria stands to gain by the adoption of a 32l- 
kilometer exclusive economic zone. Politically, the country will] gain about 
8,000 square kilometers of territorial area and another 104,000 square kilo- 
meters of preserved economic resources zone. Strategically, the gain will 
help to create a large security buffer zone for the country's defense. 
Economically, the entire area will remain exclusive to Nigeria as far as 
mineral resources as well as living resources are concemed. 

So far, the fishery and mineral potentials of the coast of Nigeria are no 
more a secret. As far as unilateral claims on the sea are concerned, Nigeria 
has been considerably moderate. It took about 89 years for Nigeria to alter 
the 5-kilometer territorial sea limit to 19 kilometers, that is from 1878 

to 1967. By 1971, Nigeria had extended it to 48 kilometers and finally in 
October 1978, she declared the 32l-kilometer exclusive economic zone. It 
will be important to equally point out Nigeria's stand as to certain issues. 
As far as international seabed mining is concermed, Nigeria maintains that 
the systems of financing exploitation. the resources policy and production 
control should [words indistinct] i. check against any injuries to the 
economies of poor countries. If a new law of the sea finally emerges, it 
could--i» its own way--be a Magna Carta for these countries. 

CSO: 5200/5645 



Hamburg DER SPIEGEL in German 15 Mar 82 pp 47, 49 

[Text] With a separate treaty the FRG is undermining the LOS conference-- 
final round in the struggle for distributing gigantic reserves of raw 

The negotiating delegations had withdrawn into the seclusion of the Santa 
Clara convent in the little north Iberian city of Tordesillas. The document, 
which ths Spanish ambassador and his Portuguese colleague signed on 7 June, 
sealed the division of the world. An arbitrary line of demarcation between 
the 48th and 49th meridians guaranteed the two countries the conquest of 
entire parts of the earth: the western part was to belong to the Spaniards, 
the eastern to the Portuguese. 

The 1494 Treaty of Tordesillas, a brazen act of large power supremacy politics, 
had come into being through the mediation of Pope Alexander VI who had 
declared himself arbitrator in the distribution of continents. 

Rome is no longer in demand as the last court of appeals in the now impending 
division of the globe. The relationships are more complicated. 

Nonetheless, at the LOS conference which met for its llth session on Monday of 
last week at the United Nations in New York, the issues are the distribution 

of 71 percent of the earth's surface, the demarcation of territorial and 
economic zones at sea, shipping and fishing rights, but mainly the distribution 
of the enormous deposits of raw materials in the oceans. 

The experts estimate that in about 20 years half the world's requirements for 
nonferrous metals will be met from the oceans, mainly in the form of manganese 
nodules. At the latest, from 1988 on the facilities will be available to 
mine the precious sea rock from depths up to 7,000 meters. In addition to 
manganese and cobalt, which are used to produce high quality steels, it also 
contains copper and nickel. 

And as before in Tordesillas, it is again the great countries that want to 
assure themselves the most lucrative latifundia by exploiting their economic 
and technological position of priority in the matter of distributing these 
natural resources. 


Secretly the Americans, French, British and Germans came to an understanding 
even before adoption of a U.N. convention on the use of the oceans. The four 
delayed final signing until after the New York conference in order to keep 
the developing countries prepared for compromise. For the purpose of the 
agreement is clearly contrary to their interests: investments by companies 
which are now involved in deep-sea mining are quite emphatically to be 

But mainly the treaty partners are guaranteeing each other the right to 
protect licenses for developing fields of manganese nodules in international 
waters. The details are regulated in the national deep-sea mining laws. 

In practice this means: the four countries, which before long will be joined 
by Japan, and possibly even Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands, are independ- 
ently staking out their claims before the United Nations has reached agreement 
on international control. Thus, they are undermining the efforts of the LOS 
conference for a just distribution of the natural resources. 

Even prior to the beginning of the New York conference the parliament in Bonn, 
in rare unanimity and virtually unnoticed by the public, set a new course. 

On 21 January, shortly after 7:30 pm a small group of Bundestag delegates 

from all three fractions, who were left over from exhausting budget debates, 
“unanimously and without discussion" passed inconspicuous amendment 9/1074; 
that authorization which gives the Federal Government a free hand in negotiat- 
ing the special treaty with the United States, France and Great Britain. 

The event is unique in the history of the Bonn parliament--none of the delegates 
was familiar with the exact purpose and the details of the treaty. 

Noteworthy also is the haste: rarely have bills been pushed through the 
plenum in such a short time: there were not even 2 months between motion 
and passage. 

The action was not fishy in the eyes of the legal committee in Parliament. 
Legal committee chair, Herta Daeubler-Gmelin (SPD), admonished that to be 
sure, there was "no sweeping" constitutional consideration, but once and for 
all it would be nice to “know that the action taken is restricted to imper- 
ative exceptions.” 

But the issue might perhaps not seem so imperative to everyone. Even in the 
fraction meeting held for preliminary discussion, Uwe Holtz, the SPD's 
spokesman for development policy, had demanded a slower pace. There had 
scarcely been time for the committees to examine the bill in due order. 

Holtz stated that he feared the usable sea bottom would be divided up for the 
foreseeable future among the countries engaged in deep-sea mining; the devel- 
oping countries would be the losers. The basic idea of the LOS conference 

to administer the oceans as the “common heritage of mankind" would thus 

be turned around. 


Egon Franke and Annemarie Renger, right-wing fraction members, immediately 
brushed the critics off. Reservations were out of order, the issue had to 
be pushed through now. 

The people in Bonn had in fact gotten caught up in pressure. Mainly the 
Americans were pressing for haste. They want to see orderly circumstances 

at their doorstep as soon as possible: the first fields of manganese nodules 
are to be surveyed in the Pacific, between California and Hawaii. A huge 
area will be divided into large lots that are 160,000 square kilometers. 
National and international mining consortia can soon acquire concessions. 

The lobby is strong. Making up the party are conglomerates like Kennecott 
Copper, US Steel, Rio Tino Zinc, BP, Shell, Mitsubishi and Lockheed. For 
the FRG Preussag, Metallgesellschaft and Salzgitter are involved, which as a 
consortium hold 25 percent of the “Ocean Management Inc” (OMI) multi. 

Thanks to the involvement of OMI the Germans might be able to count on an 
annual mining output of over 4 million tons in 6 years when mining, according 
to the agreement, may begin at the earliest. With a single stroke the FRG 
would have met almost 40 percent of its nickel requirements and even up to 
100 percent for cobalt and manganese. 

Of course, at the LOS conference the developing countries wanted to put a 

stop to that. According to the demand, the industrial countries would have 

to make know-how and technology in deep-sea mining accessible to the countries 
of the Third World at “appropriate and reasonable prices," as stated in the 
draft treaty. An international raw materials authority is to control mining 
even operate it itself from case to case and distribute a part of the yields 

in an appropriate way. 

Something like this reeks of nasty regimentation as far as the Federation of 
German Industries (BDI) is concerned. In a lobby letter to the members of 
four Bundestag committees the BDI let the members know what the result would 
be if the wishes of the developing countries were accommodated: "The LOS 
convention will’ degrade “Germany into an interior country like Nepal." 


CSO: 5200/2058 FND 



\ ax