Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, United Nations and General International Matters, Volume II

330. Memorandum From the Deputy Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs’ Special Assistant (Sanders) to the Deputy Under Secretary of State (Murphy)¹

Washington, February 5, 1958.

SUBJECT

• Diplomatic Preparations for the Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Law of the Sea

I understand you would be interested in receiving a brief report on the diplomatic preparations for the subject Conference. This aspect of our preparations has been conducted primarily through our field posts but also in part through visiting field trips by specialists.

Pre-Conference Diplomatic Discussions Through the Field Posts

In May of last year all American field posts were alerted to the importance we attach to the Conference and to the need for reporting developments concerning the Conference on a continuing basis.² In November of the same year the posts were instructed to undertake discussions on the problems expected to come before the Conference of special interest to the United States.³ The agenda of the Conference comprises the 73 articles of the Report of the International Law Commission⁴ (covering the territorial sea, regime of the high seas, international fisheries rights and the continental shelf) and the special question of access to the sea on the part of land-locked countries. Out of this large number of issues the Department selected for diplomatic discussions the limits of the territorial sea and international fisheries rights, including the controversial question of the definition of the living resources of the continental shelf. To supplement the briefings on the territorial sea question, colored slides and detailed commentary were sent to the posts showing the adverse consequences to the security of the United States and of the free world of any extension of the territorial sea limits.

In view of the minority support expected at the Conference for the three-mile rule, and of the importance of ascertaining whether a compromise is within reach which would increase support for the rule, certain field posts were also requested to make discreet inquiries concerning the attitudes of governments toward the Canadian proposal. This proposal would retain the three-mile territorial sea but add nine miles of exclusive jurisdiction over fisheries. The remaining field posts were requested to submit their estimate of the attitudes of the respective governments toward the proposal.

The field posts in the twelve land-locked countries were instructed to indicate, at their discretion, our interest in the special problems of these countries. It is hoped that the majority of these countries will be persuaded to adopt attitudes favorable to our views at the Conference.

Pre-Conference Diplomatic Preparations by Means of Field Trips

To supplement the discussions undertaken by the field posts, officers of the Departments of State and Interior made trips for special briefings on the fisheries questions to Denmark, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey and the United Kingdom.

Special discussions were also held in New York between representatives of the Departments of State and Defense and of Canada. The latter were headed by Deputy Minister of Northern Affairs, R. G. Robertson. USUN has briefed representatives to the UN who are expected to attend the Conference.

A team of Naval officers also visited London, Oslo, Bonn and Madrid for a special showing of the slides on the security consequences of an extension of the territorial sea limits.

Results of the Pre-Conference Diplomatic Discussions

Reports have been received from all posts except those in Bulgaria, Nepal, Poland and Rumania. The Soviet bloc countries have not been approached. The Embassies in Mexico and Saudi Arabia considered it inadvisable to approach their respective governments.

The information received has greatly assisted the Department and other interested government agencies in preparations for the Conference. It is believed that these conversations have served to create a better understanding of the position of the US and of some of the highly technical problems involved in the fisheries question.

The tentative estimates of governmental attitudes on the question of the limits of the territorial sea and contiguous zones for fisheries which were sent to you with my memorandum of January 30⁵ are based in large part on the pre-Conference diplomatic discussions.

I should add that the consultations on the Canadian proposal and on abstention (US proposal in the fisheries field) on which there are differences of view within the Government, were authorized by the Under Secretary.

WS

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files. 399.731/2–558. Confidential. Copies were sent to Becker, Wilcox, and to Director of Intelligence and Research Cumming. The source text bears the following notation by Murphy: “Gov. Herter may be interested.”
2. See Foreign Relations, 1955–1957, vol. xi, p. 570
3. See ibid., p. 597.
4. For text of this report, July 1956, see ILC Yearbook, 1956, vol. II, pp. 253–255; for the 73 draft articles on the Law of the Sea, see ibid., pp. 256–264.
5. Not found.