The draft convention further imposes an international revenue- 

 sharing obligation on the production of hydrocarbons from the 

 continental shelf beyond the 200-mile limit. Developing countries 

 that are net importers of hydrocarbons are exempt from this obli- 

 gation. 



The draft convention contains provisions concerning liberation 

 movements, like the PLO, and their eligibility to obtain a share of 

 the revenues of the Seabed Authority. 



The draft convention lacks any provisions for protecting invest- 

 ments made prior to entry into force of the Convention. 



Mr. Chairman, on the basis of the foregoing difficulties and 

 others that I have not taken the time to mention, it is the best 

 judgment of this administration that this draft convention would 

 not obtain the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate. Of course, 

 since the treaty would require implementing legislation, the House 

 would also have a major role that must be considered, 



We have reason to doubt that the House of Representatives 

 would pass the necessary legislation to give effect to a treaty 

 containing provisions such as these. The provisions that I have 

 mentioned raise questions for this administration. We must seri- 

 ously consider whether those provisions should be included in a 

 treaty to which the United States would become a party, unless 

 there were a countervailing national interest. 



The review will evaluate all of our national interests and objec- 

 tives, including national security, to determine the extent to which 

 they are protected by the draft convention, to identify necessary 

 modifications to the draft convention. The review will also examine 

 with great care whether these same interests and objectives would 

 fare better or worse in the absence of a treaty. 



During the course of the review, we will consult with the Con- 

 gress, with other nations, including our principal allies, and with a 

 broad spectrum of the private sector. We anticipate that this will 

 be a fairly lengthy process. The administration believes that any 

 decision concerning a subject as comprehensive and complex as this 

 one must be taken with deliberation and with keen understanding 

 of foreign and domestic reactions. 



Accordingly, we have determined that the policy review process 

 cannot be fully completed before the resumed 10th session of the 

 Law of the Sea Conference in Geneva this August. We must have 

 time to ensure adequate opportunity to test our tentative views 

 with the widest possible number of countries. 



At the recently concluded session of the Conference, disappoint- 

 ment and apprehension were indeed registered at the decision of 

 the United States to undertake such a sweeping review, although 

 this reaction was not universal. The administration realizes the 

 concern and disappointment that this decision has engendered. 

 However, we feel strongly that the American people would wish to 

 see this review occur, rather than being plunged headlong into this 

 treaty. 



We think that the world community, too, will be better served if 

 we return to the Conference with a realistic assessment of what 

 will satisfy our people and our Congress. The administration does 

 not wish to be in a position of misleading other countries into 

 concluding a treaty they will expect us to ratify, a treaty which in 



