Survival cmd the Sea
227
Alarmed by the prospects of an underwater land—grab in which
the developing nations would inevitably be the losers, Malta decided
to raise the issue in the General Assembly of the United Nations.
Originally, a declaration and treaty were proposed but by the time
that the agenda item was assigned to a committee this had been
reduced to the ‘examination of the question of the reservation
exclusively for peaceful purposes of the sea—bed and the ocean oor,
and the sub—soil thereof, underlying the high seas beyond the limits
of present national jurisdiction, and the use of their resources in the
interests of mankind’. The address given by Malta’s representative
Arvid Pardo to the committee on November I, 1967, received
Widespread press coverage which could not disguise the political
interest and the suspicions aroused in the minds of some legislators.
One member of the US. House of Representatives hinted darkly
that the Maltese delegation had been ‘put up
to make the proposal’,
perhaps by the British. However, Pardo was content to explain that
his country, being situated in the midst of the Mediterranean,
could not avoid being vitally interested in the oceans.
The reduction in the forcefulness of the terms of the Maltese
proposal indicated the unwillingness of many states to make any
denite decision on such an important topic. But although no
substantial declarations emerged, the ‘defusing’ of the proposal shed
interesting light upon the views of various groups of states. The
developing nations, for example, were either strongly in favour of
an international body to regulate exploitation or wanted an im—
mediate declaration of the principles put forward by Malta in a
supporting memorandum. The states With the technological
capability to move into the oceans, on the other hand, were far more
cautions and hesitant. The Soviet Union wanted to keep the
preparatory work for any decision at a national, rather than inter—
national, level. The United States, although apparently more
willing to join a co—operative study of ”the problem, advised that a
‘hasty approach would indeed be imprudent’. The fact that the
resolution approved by the General Assembly bore little resemblance
to the original agenda item probably reects concessions made to
ensure the support of countries including the Soviet Union, the
United States, japan and the United Kingdom who, unlike the
developing nations, already have substantial investments in marine
and related affairs.
The only obvious ofcial result of Malta’s brave effort was the
227
Alarmed by the prospects of an underwater land—grab in which
the developing nations would inevitably be the losers, Malta decided
to raise the issue in the General Assembly of the United Nations.
Originally, a declaration and treaty were proposed but by the time
that the agenda item was assigned to a committee this had been
reduced to the ‘examination of the question of the reservation
exclusively for peaceful purposes of the sea—bed and the ocean oor,
and the sub—soil thereof, underlying the high seas beyond the limits
of present national jurisdiction, and the use of their resources in the
interests of mankind’. The address given by Malta’s representative
Arvid Pardo to the committee on November I, 1967, received
Widespread press coverage which could not disguise the political
interest and the suspicions aroused in the minds of some legislators.
One member of the US. House of Representatives hinted darkly
that the Maltese delegation had been ‘put up
to make the proposal’,
perhaps by the British. However, Pardo was content to explain that
his country, being situated in the midst of the Mediterranean,
could not avoid being vitally interested in the oceans.
The reduction in the forcefulness of the terms of the Maltese
proposal indicated the unwillingness of many states to make any
denite decision on such an important topic. But although no
substantial declarations emerged, the ‘defusing’ of the proposal shed
interesting light upon the views of various groups of states. The
developing nations, for example, were either strongly in favour of
an international body to regulate exploitation or wanted an im—
mediate declaration of the principles put forward by Malta in a
supporting memorandum. The states With the technological
capability to move into the oceans, on the other hand, were far more
cautions and hesitant. The Soviet Union wanted to keep the
preparatory work for any decision at a national, rather than inter—
national, level. The United States, although apparently more
willing to join a co—operative study of ”the problem, advised that a
‘hasty approach would indeed be imprudent’. The fact that the
resolution approved by the General Assembly bore little resemblance
to the original agenda item probably reects concessions made to
ensure the support of countries including the Soviet Union, the
United States, japan and the United Kingdom who, unlike the
developing nations, already have substantial investments in marine
and related affairs.
The only obvious ofcial result of Malta’s brave effort was the