Abstract
So far I have argued that the U.N., contrary to the views of John Conrad, is not and cannot be of any importance in international relations or in preserving peace. Yet, although unimportant materially, it can do some mischief in morally misleading people and in confusing issues. One clear instance is the scandalous resolution by which the Arab bloc succeeded in getting the U.N. to label Zionism a form of racism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For a more complete account of the Law of the Sea than we can provide here, see A Quiet Revolution: The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (New York: United Nations, 1984).
See “The Enterprise; Economic Viability of Deep-Sea-Bed Mining of Poly-metallic Nodules,” submitted by the Delegation of Australia to the Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority. Document LOS/PCN/SCN.2/WP.10, 14 January 1986. Note, however, that the volume of minerals on the ocean beds is not merely “suspected,” as Dr. van den Haag puts the matter, but reliably estimated to be about 1.5 trillion tons in the Pacific Ocean alone.
This concept originated with President Johnson’s warning in 1966 against “a new form of colonial competition among the maritime powers... a race to grab and hold the lead under the high seas.... We must ensure that the deep sea-beds and the ocean bottoms are, and remain, the legacy of all human beings.”
As of this writing, 159 nations have now signed, and 26 have ratified. Sixty ratifications are required before the treaty can go into force.
Opposition to this basic concept seems to have originated with President Reagan. In 1970 President Nixon, no radical internationalist, proposed that all nations adopt a treaty under which they would renounce all national claims to resources of the sea beyond the continental shelf and agree to regard these as the “common heritage of mankind.” I do not claim that this phrase originated with President Nixon, but he certainly did not reject it.
Although the assembly would “elect” the council membership, eligibility would be constrained by rules. Four states would come from those nations that are the largest investors in seabed mining, 4 would come from major consumers of seabed minerals, 4 would be major land-based exporters of the same minerals, 6 would be from landlocked nations, and 18 would be chosen geographically, with at least one country from each region.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 Ernest van den Haag and John P. Conrad
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van den Haag, E., Conrad, J.P. (1987). Mischief on the High Seas. In: The U.N. In or Out?. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-5984-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-5984-3_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-306-42524-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-5984-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive