92 



tending 3 miles from shore and the United States showed some disjio- 

 sition in 1958 to enlarge that definition by saying that the territorial 

 waters would extend 6 miles from shore with fishing rights extending 

 12 miles from shore, but, again, may I say to tlie committee that 

 the area under discussion could not possibly involve any of those 

 definitions. 



Mr. Fascell. Well, I am not sure that I am ready to agree with 

 that statement as yet, Mr. Danzig. If we have no international law 

 except by the opinion of scholars ; if there are other ways of making 

 international law — for example, by force or by agreement — and if 

 some countries are claiming territorial jurisdiction beyond the point 

 which the United States is willing to accept, then I think we have 

 a problem. 



Certainly we have been struggling with this issue for many years, 

 and as you know we have not reached any definitive decision on it to 

 date. 



Mr. Danzig. That is correct. 



Mr. Fascell. So, it would seem to me that we have not finished with 

 the first step as yet. Unless we have a hard and fast agreement on 

 the definition of territorial waters how can we go to the next step 

 and determine what constitutes the continental shelf, and who has 

 sovereignty or jurisdiction over the continental shelf? 



Mr. Eichelberger? 



Mr. Eichelberger. I believe the 3-mile limit was usually considered 

 the limit, but by act of Congress the United States and others have 

 extended this to 12 miles. 



It is interesting that whereas representatives of Malta and our Gov- 

 ernment and the majority of governments felt that the agenda item 

 on the sea should go to the First Committee as an important political 

 issue, some of the Latin American states which had been extending 

 their fishing rights several hundred miles into the oceans wanted it 

 to go to the Legal Committee. Probably it was felt that a long legal 

 argument is the most that would be accomplished at this session. 

 1 would agree with you, sir, that we have to hold to very limited 

 territorial seas. 



Mr. Fascell. I didn't know that I was making that assertion Mr. 

 Eichelberger. I am not sure I am ready to make that decision yet. 

 It seems to me I was just pointing out that some basic issues remain 

 to be resolved. You have raised another problem here, of course, by 

 referring to some coastal states which wish to extend their fishing 

 rights some 300 or 400 miles offshore. 



Are we talking now about jurisdiction ? Or sovereignty ? Are these 

 claimed offshore areas territorial waters? 



Well, now, I see Mr. Danzig shaking his head. Yet I think a legal 

 case probably could be made, whether or not it has any foundation 

 or acceptability in international law, certainly a coastal state could 

 make such a claim. Whether it would succeed in getting it accepted 

 is another matter. 



Mr. Eichelberger. Mr. Chairman, that is the whole basis of my 

 argument, that we establish as quickly as possible an international 

 regime to prevent these fantastic claims being made. 



Mr. Fascell. Covering all of these points ? 



