144 



U.N. is makin^T. He began last year, and the report will be presented 

 to the next Assembly. It would receive that report and it would con- 

 sider the possibilities for international cooperation in research and 

 exploration, which Avill presumably be laid out in that report when 

 it comes out. 



Moreover, we think the committee might consider legal questions 

 of the type raised in the Malta proposal. What kind of a legal regime 

 do we want in the deep seas, and what do we look toward on security 

 questions and economic questions ? The committee would make reconi- 

 mendations to the General Assembly and it would decide where to go 

 from there. 



In the outer space area I think we began the process in 1958. It 

 culminated with the conclusion of the Outer Space Treaty just a few 

 weeks ago. 



The Ambassador would in this speech or later forecast the need for 

 principles or guidelines. The discussion I happened to hear just before 

 we came on today indicates, I think, very clearly the need for decisions 

 on these matters at some time. 



I might mention just one facet of that. Our thinking is that if legal 

 principles are to be worked out and generally accepted through the 

 U.N., we think that they ought to exclude the competition of national 

 sovereignties on the deep ocean floor. 



The direction we see a need for is toward an open and nondiscrim- 

 inatory regime which would permit the development of the deep 

 seabed on what we would hope would be the best possible terms. 



More than that, we would hope that at some stage Ambassador 

 Goldberg could refer to the need for encouraging cooperative action 

 for scientific purposes. As we see it, the U.N. is well fitted to stimulate 

 and coordinate scientific and exploratory activities. 



We wouldn't expect that the U.N. would be operational. We would 

 expect I think that maritime nations would be operational but stim- 

 ulating, coordinating the work which different nations do is clearly a 

 job for some international agency. 



[Security deletion.] 



Finally, on arms controls questions we intend to stress the com- 

 plexity of the problem. There are a number of difficult features about 

 it. [Security deletion.] 



We think we can make our views known on this and there will be 

 no immediate action on it. Of course, this is not an area in which we 

 can be bound without our own consent. We don't anticipate the focus 

 of tlie discussion will be mainly on this subject initially. 



Finally, I would like to say we intend to keep the committee advised 

 at your convenience and pleasure as this subject opens up and de- 

 velops in the Assembly. It is difficult to see at this time just how far 

 they will get or what specific kind of action they will want to take. 

 I doubt it would be possible in a large body like the Assembly devoting 

 only relatively few days to this to get down to specific decisions. That, 

 I think, is probably out of the question. We could expect a procedural 

 result such as the establishment of a committee of the kind I have men- 

 tioned and then we would work on from there over time. 



Mr. Fascell. I want to thank all you gentlemen for following up 

 on your own initiative the discussion we had in the last subcommittee 

 meeting and bringing us up to date on developments relating to this 

 subject. 



