13 
ing sunultaneously in the same submarine areas for identical resources. 
This prospect convinces me that'a system of law is needed to avoid 
the threat of anarchy in ocean space. By ocean space, I mean the sea- 
bed and superadjacent waters beyond territorial seas and continental 
shelves. 
In this regard, I strongly support President Johnson’s statement 
on July 13, 1966: 
Under no circumstances, we believe, must we ever allow the prospects of 
rich harvest and mineral weaith to create a new form of colonial competition 
among the maritime nations. We must be careful to avoid a race to grab and to 
hold the lands under the high seas. We must ensure that the deep seas and the 
ocean bottoms are, and remain, the legacy of all human beings. 
Many plans are already afoot for organizing ocean space. 
Some responsible people, such as the World Peace Through Law 
group, want its resources handled by an international agency and the 
usuiruct either given to the United Nations or, as the Government of 
Malta has suggested, distributed among the poorer nations. 
Others heartily oppose creating any legal system for ocean space at 
this time. They argue that its wealth should accrue to those whose 
enterprise and ingenuity have already achieved the technology re- 
quired to exploit it and the means to defend it. This is known among 
maritime lawyers as the fiag nation approach, in which, incidentally, 
I believe our own Pentagon and the Kremlin don’t stand too far apart. 
Between these two extremes, I would like to see our Government 
urge a middle course to bring about a generally acceptable legal regime. 
My Senate Resolution 186 would take the first step by having our 
United Nations representative call for a declaration of legal principles 
by the General Assembly. 
If followed, these principles will give the edge to those nations who 
now are most technologically advanced and thus most able to take ad- 
vantage of the resources available. But they will also permit others to 
build their own capabilities so that they, too, in time can compete 
freely for the underwater riches. In short, the regime I offer would not 
lock out for centuries those countries who are presently underde- 
veloped. If such a permanent lockout occurred, it could eventually lead 
to revolution, bloodshed, and war, as did the late great colonial 
empires. 
NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY EXTENDING INTO OCEAN SPACE 
Specifically, the system I have in mind would forbid the extension 
of national sovereignty into ocean space, just as recent treaties have 
done for Antarctica and outer space. It will establish instead a United 
Nations mechanism for licensing nations to exploit the commercial 
resources of deep oceans; the licenses would be awarded for finite 
periods on a renewable basis. 
Like the treaties just mentioned, this system would encourage peace- 
ful use of the area and prohibit the propaganda of a whole new gen- 
eration of nuclear weaponry, which might otherwise be installed on 
the sea floor. It would also prohibit pollution of the seas from radio- 
active waste materials. 
Finally, it would set up a United Nations sea guard to assure com- 
pliance with the licensing arrangement and other provisions of the 
regime. The sea guard would be fashioned after the U.S. Coast 
87-490—67 
3 
