111. Telegram 3110 From the Mission to the United Nations to the Department of State1 2
Subj:
- Outer Space Committee Completes Work
1. UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space completed its two week session late Friday afternoon June 20 by unanimously adopting a report on the following subjects:
2. Work of the Subcommittee:
(A) Moon treaty: The Comite commended to member states the two draft articles X and X bis, regarding natural resources of the moon and other celestial bodies, as a possible basis for reaching a compromise solution on the problem of natural resources. There was relatively little discussion of the moon treaty during this session, particularly after no delegations indicated any changes in their positions since the last meeting of the Legal Subcomite. The Soviets, however, did not downplay the importance of this treaty in a way they had indicated they would do at the end of the Legal Subcomite session.
(B) Direct broadcasting by satellites: The Comite simply expressed satisfaction with the set of principles drafted by the Legal Subcomite and agreed that work should continue. Although there was considerable pressure early in the session to attempt to continue the negotiations of language on these principles during this session, particularly because of the presence of Mr. Vellodi, the Indian representative who chaired the drafting group in the Legal Subcomite, no such work was accomplished, largely because the US, the FRG, the UK and a few others indicated they would not now be prepared to move further than in the Legal Subcomite, and hence such work would not be very useful.
Mr. Vellodi, who served as a very active and successful Chairman, indicated privately to the US and several other dels that he would not be returning to the UN to continue the work on DBS because of what he called the unconstructive and troubled atmosphere toward progress developing in the Outer Space Committee. He perceptively indicated to USDel (Stowe) that he did not anticipate successful conclusion of the DBS principles next year because of an absence of political will to do so, and he was rather viciously attacked by the Soviet del this session, being accused of using third-rate tactics and unbecoming maneuvers in his attempts to gain support for an international conference on space applications. He also indicated to others disappointment that the US del did not support his attempts to encourage such a conference or to step in and defend him against the Soviet attack. Substance of conference debate is referred to below.
(C) Remote sensing: By far the greatest amount of time of the Comite session was devoted to the subject of remote sensing, either in the Legal Subcomite or the Scientific and Technical Subcomite contexts. With regard to the Legal Subcomite, the most important issue discussed was the mandate for future work, and in particular how reference to drafting in this area should be made. This question was eventually sent to a small informal working group attended by about twelve delegations, whose work became difficult and protracted in US del’s view principally because Brazilian rep Dayrell de Lima continuously blocked efforts at compromise in attempt to compel Comite to recommend that the Legal Subcomite draft legal principles but without recommending that it take into consideration legal, organizational, economic or technical implications of remote sensing before or as it undertook that drafting. US del took position that although drafting on particular areas of agreement could begin before agreement was reached on all areas, drafting on any one particular area should not be undertaken without first taking into consideration the above implications.
Comment: The Brazilian tactic was obviously in reaction to successful US efforts during last Legal Subcomite session to avoid drafting, and is presumably based on presumption that the less these detailed implications are studied, the more likely many countries are to support the Brazil-Argentina text. This of course is one of the reasons why we are anxious not to have the Subcomite move too quickly. End comment.
Mandate for Legal Subcomite eventually agreed requests Subcomite “(a) to continue its detailed legal consideration of remote sensing from space of the earth (i.e. of its natural resources and its natural environment) taking into account the various views of states expressed on the subject, including proposals for draft international instruments, and taking into account all relevant discussions, views and conclusions concerning organizational, economic and technical aspects of remote sensing in the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee including those contained in the report of its Twelfth Session (A/AC.105/150, paras. 15–29), with a view to identifying further common elements among the views of states,” and “(b) to proceed to the drafting of principles in regard to those particular areas of the subject where common elements in the views of states are identified.” Brazilians insisted on express if unwritten agreement that at least half the Subcomite’s time on remote sensing be allocated to drafting regardless of para (a), and US del gave its express if unwritten refusal to any such commitment. We did indicate, however, that we were not interested in preventing drafting altogether, but rather that we were quite interested in preventing what we considered irresponsible drafting without reference to the specified implications. The Brazilians, French, and Soviets indicated they intended to press for drafting at next Subcomite session on basis of five areas of common agreement identified in report of last Legal Subcomite session. The Soviets played a relatively moderate role in this debate, but the French rep (Chahid-Nourai) argued forcefully for drafting to begin. French rep indicated to us privately, however, that he was concentrating on procedural debate in order to avoid substance because France was not quite as comfortable as it used to be with the French-Soviet text. The substance of various drafts was not discussed by any dels except in general debate statement at beginning of Comite session.
(D) Definition of outer space: The Comite simply agreed the Legal Subcomite should continue its work on this subject, although detailed statements were made by Italian del and by COSPAR observer. Soviets again privately urged US to take a close look at the problems involved in order to preempt LDC’s from coming up first with a definition which would probably be unacceptable.
3. Report of the Scientific and Technical Subcomite:
(A) Remote sensing: The Comite noted the views of the STSC on this item, confirmed its view that the studies of organizational and financial matters should progress together with consideration of legal aspects of remote sensing, and endorsed the recommendation that the Secretariat prepare certain specified studies and that the SYG undertake the requested steps.
(B) United Nations Conference on Space Applications: After extensive debate on proposal by Austria and India that the Comite establish a special ad hoc working group to examine the desirability, organization, and agenda of a possible UN conference on space in the late 1970’s, the Comite finally adopted a compromise request that the STSC “devote a number of meetings during its 13th session, including the possibility of convening an informal working group during that session, to consider the desirability of holding an international conference on space matters, and to report to the next Comite session on this subject...” The Comite also expressed the view that attention to space applications should be paid by the proposed UN conference on science and technology discussed by ECOSOC. On this matter the US del stated that while we did not oppose the idea of holding a conference, we could not support its implementation until some purpose to be served was identified and agreed. We were therefore willing for the STSC to examine the desirability, but as of now not for the Comite to commit itself to hold it. The Soviets were extremely negative about every aspect of the question.
4. Schedule of work: The Committee agreed to recommend to the UNGA that the STSC should meet 22 March-9 April in New York; the Legal Subcomite 3–28 May in Geneva; and the full Comite 28 June-9 July in New York. The recommendation of the Committee on Conferences that all future meetings of the Legal Subcomite be held in New York was hotly debated, but the Comite eventually recommended that the GA take full account of the Comite’s desire to continue the New York-Geneva rotation.