188. Memorandum From the Executive Secretary of the Department of State (Bremer) to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Clark)1
SUBJECT
- Law of the Sea Negotiations and the Final Act
The United States has sent a small technical level delegation to attend the final session of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) currently taking place in Montego Bay December 6–December 10, at which those States which participated in UNCLOS III will be invited to sign the Final Act of the Conference. The Convention will be opened for signature following signing of the Final Act on December 10. It will remain open for signature for two years.
The United States, which will sign the Final Act, thereby attests that the Convention in its six official linguistic texts is, in fact, that [Page 533] negotiated during the law of the sea negotiations. The signing of the Final Act implies no legal consequences for the U.S. The U.S. may offer statements on the record in plenary as to the meaning of textual provisions, in response to interventions by other States, if needed. We are thus able to protect the US juridical position with regard to law of the sea.
The United States Delegation has met with a number of delegations to date. Japan has stated it will not sign the Convention at Montego Bay, and will at the earliest be able to do so at the end of January. Peru has announced that it will not sign the Convention in Montego Bay, primarily due to the fact that the Convention would deprive Peru of its 200-mile territorial sea. Peruvian President Belaunde has called for a debate and subsequent national consensus as a prerequisite to signature. In that Peru was one of the foremost proponents of the Treaty in its formative stages this is a promising development from the US vantage, as most South American coastal states share Peru’s coastal orientation. Thus far at least the following countries will not sign the Convention in Jamaica: The U.S., the U.K., the FRG, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Israel, Turkey, Argentina, Ecuador and Peru.
Further, Canada, having been informed of our strong objections to certain portions of their proposed plenary statement which would have been adverse to our navigation interests, agreed to excise some of the offending portions.2 Foreign Minister McEachen, the Canadian head of delegation, delivered that statement on December 6. The Canadian statement as delivered, emphasized the concept of a “package deal” and the Canadian view that the transit passage through international straits provisions of the treaty are a major inducement to signing.
In furtherance of our private resolve to keep to a minimum the number of States signing the Convention (as contrasted with the Final Act) at Montego Bay, we are making separate demarches to Uruguay, Chile, and South Korea.3 The United States has prepared a plenary statement and will offer comment on the impact of certain Convention articles as the need arises.
- Source: Department of State, Central Foreign Policy File, P820179–0858. Confidential. Drafted by Bernhardt and Malone.↩
- See Document 191.↩
- The Department transmitted the text of the démarche in telegram 339805 to Montevideo, telegram 339996 to Seoul, and telegram 339804 to Santiago, December 7. (Department of State, Central Foreign Policy File, D820633–0521, D820634–0507, and D820633–0497, respectively)↩
- An unknown hand signed for Bremer above his typed signature.↩