503 



Mr. Pollack. The U.N. resolutions that called for the studies that 

 you quoted from my statement were introduced, essentially, l^ecause 

 this is a problem that was predictable and has been predictable for 

 some years. The advance of our technology in this field has been 

 moving faster than was anticipated when the Conventions were 

 drafted in 1958. Our position in 1966 and our position today remains 

 the same, that we need to know a great deal more about the nature 

 of that environment and what will be required to work in it before 

 we or any other nation can intelligently come to any conclusion as 

 to the nature of the regime. 



Mr. Rogers. You jumped into the international field before you 

 decided where we stand under present law. 



Mr. Pollack. All we have jumped into in these two resolutions was 

 a scientific inquiry as to the state of our knowledge. 



Mr. Rogers. You just voted to have a study made of the Malta 

 situation ? 



Mr. Pollack. Yes. 



Mr. Rogers. You had Ambassador Goldberg do it. You did not have 

 a directive from Congress to do it, and yet you cannot tell me how far 

 an American company can go out and exploit the bottom of the sea 

 under present law and under the Geneva Conference. 



Mr. Pollack. I think in this respect the situation is comparable to 

 the situation in outer space. Until you achieve the capability to deal 

 in outer space there is no reason to have a law. This was previously 

 the case with respect to the deep ocean floor, but we are rapidly reach- 

 ing the point where this will no longer be the case. 



Mr. Rogers. The point I am making is that this Nation has a ca- 

 pability of exploiting, probably more than any other nation including 

 Russia, the deep ocean bottom. 



Mr. Pollack. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Rogers. And instead of proceeding under the present law and 

 the Geneva Conference to bring a benefit to this Nation, you are ready 

 to push this into the U.N. before we know how far a company can go 

 out to exploit for the benefit of our own people ? 



Mr. Pollack. I am not sure which definition would benefit most our 

 industry and economy. There is a definition that can be made — and 

 I do not know what the consequence would be 



Mr. Rogers. I think if an effort were made to gather our scientific 

 knowledge — Congress set up a national council and commission to go 

 into this and answer some questions, but instead of waiting in 1966 you 

 hopped into the U.N. before a national policy was established. You set 

 up an ad hoc conmiittee that is determining national policy instead of 

 the Congress.. The State Department has jumped us into the U.N. 

 and you do not have enough knowledge yet because our commissions 

 have not reported, nor have the scientific groups made their report. 

 And you cannot even tell us how far present law will let us go. 



Mr. Pollack. The absence of adequate knowledge is a subject on 

 which I think we are in complete agreement. I do not think it is yet 

 clear whether the interests of the American industrial concerns will 

 be best served by having the nations of the world lay claim to large 

 areas off their shelves which they would then be in a position to deny to 

 our industrial interests. I do not know where the merits lie on that 

 question. 



