90 
U.N. RELATIONS AND THE THIRD LAW OF THE SEA CONFERENCE 
The decision to convene a Third U.N. Conference on the Law of 
the Sea was formally made by the 25th U.N. General Assembly in 
December 1970 (U.N.G.A. Res. 2750 C (XXV)). A two-week orga- 
nizational meeting of the Conference was subsequently scheduled to 
be held in New York in 1973 followed in 1974 by an eight-week sub- 
stantive session in Santiago, Chile (later rescheduled for Caracas, 
Venezuela). The Seabed Committee was requested to prepare a com- 
prehensive list of subjects and issues relating to the Law of the Sea 
and draft articles on these issues. In deliberations throughout the 
July and August 1971 session of the Seabed Committee, many pro- 
posals were set forth, but there was little agreement as to the form 
of control the international seabed regime should exercise. Debate 
centered on the type of regime, the machinery to regulate it, whether 
it should be independent or under the aegis of the United Nations, 
and the powers of the machinery. Suggestions for the machinery to 
regulate seabed mining include: (1) a registration system; (2) a li- 
censing system; (3) an international monopoly wherein the regime can 
directly exploit resources; (4) a combination of direct operating au- 
thority by the regime, and licensing and/or registration by individual 
states. 
The U.S. working paper detailed the structure for a strong inter- 
national regime with the power to issue licenses on a nondiscriminatory 
basis to states and enterprises sponsored by states and procedures for 
compulsory settlement of disputes. Most of the developed nations 
also favored some form of licensing arrangement. On the other hand, 
the delegate from Trinidad and Tobago in summarizing the Latin 
American working paper stated, “The concept of a licensing or con- 
cession system is in our view inconsistent with the principle of common 
heritage” 2 and advocated the direct exploitation concept to be de- 
veloped initially through joint ventures or profit sharing arrange- 
ments. Spokesmen for the Soviet Bloc proposed a small agency with 
a small professional staff to provide administrative oversight of deep 
seabed mining. 
During the years prior to the convening of the first session of the 
Third U.N. Law of the Sea Conference in 1978, the U.S. negotiating 
position underwent a major change in emphasis. From the time it was 
first formally announced in 1970, the U.S. position on the Law of the 
Sea met with opposition not only internationally but also at home. The 
initial position primarily reflected the strategic interests of the De- 
partment of Defense. This called for a renunciation of national claims 
to seabed resources beyond the depth of 200 meters and the establish- 
ment, beyond this point, of an international regime to govern the ex- 
ploitation of seabed resources. This limit to seaward extension of the 
continental shelf boundary reflected military fears of expansion of 
coastal state sovereignty to ultimately close off U.S. military access to 
coastal areas and straits around the world and limit the placement 
of antisubmarine warfare (ASW) detection devices. The military in- 
fluence even extended to advocating limited preferential rights for 
coastal nations over the fishery resources off their shores. 
18 United Nations. Report of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Seabed and the 
Ocean Floor Beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction, General Assembly, Official Records, 
26th session, supplement No. 21 A/8421, New York, 1971, p. 21. 
