o71 
I submit that, thinking in terms of United States long-term strategy in ocean 
space, basic to this truly complex development of deep ocean mineral resources 
is the imperative need the synchronize and coordinate diplomacy, domestic legis- 
lation, and administrative practice with the acquisition of knowledge and the 
ereation of technology in the deep ocean. 
We need more even rudimentary knowledge of the ocean depths and the re- 
sources which may or may not be there. We are only beginning to create a tech- 
nology which will lead first to knowledge and ultimately—we hope—to com- 
mercial exploitation. 
A genuine need exists to educate the governmental officials of all nations as to 
the realities of life in ocean space. Great expectations of immediate wealth have 
been fostered ; these must be quietly, patiently exposed as drastically overdrawn. 
At this stage of our knowledge we cannot prepare a final draft of a detailed legal 
regime for ocean space. We should not assert that the boundary between the 
coastal state continental shelf and the international ocean space should be here 
and nowhere else, irrespective of the shape of the reciprocal pieces in this puzzle. 
Nor is it yet time to call another conference on the Law of the Sea, or to promul- 
gate a U.N. resolution at this moment, although that might become appropriate 
later. 
This does not imply inaction. We have a tremendous amount of work to do 
educating ourselves and the other nations as to how best to attain and utilize, 
under what rules and which governmental entities, the resources of ocean space. 
Our ideas as to the legal regime should develop coordinately with the progress 
of technology. 
In furtherance of the objectives of this Declaration of Principles, S. Res. 33, I 
submit that we can and should do the following: 
1. Create a U.S. mining claim law for our own continental shelf. This we 
should be able to draft now, realizing that domestic legislation or administra- 
tive rules are much easier to change than an international treaty. 
2. Gain operating experience under this mining claim law and the Con- 
tinental Shelf rules of other nations. 
3. Continue exploration and research in the deep ocean, under the present 
general rules of international law, supplemented as time goes on by informal 
codes of conduct agreed to by the great maritime powers. 
4, Work out interim arrangements in limited areas with the few nations 
directly concerned on a reciprocal basis, fixing the shelf boundary and ele- 
mentary detailed rules for the limited international area; gain experience 
working on and off the shelf under the applicable coastal state and inter- 
national rules. 
5. Set up a simple international claim registry office, where notice can be 
given of intent to work or actual working of a particular area of the deep 
ocean seabed or subsoil. 
6. As technological capabilities expand, develop concurrently from avail- 
able working experience in all areas a body of detailed rules for mineral 
resource exploitation of the international deep ocean. Despite reliance for a 
number of years on currently established international law, unquestionably 
some day new detailed rules will be needed. Some industries and some nations 
may have little interest in establishing an international. legal regime in 
detail. But for a Great Power like the United States, particularly for its hard 
mineral industry, the need may be paramount in little more than a decade. 
AS we learn, we must think, write, create these rules. 
7. As the body of the detailed international legal regime slowly develops, 
with the concurrence of the great maritime powers and the most important 
coastal states, on the basis of general satisfaction with and adherence to 
these international rules, create the simplest appropriate international ma- 
chinery to secure compliance with this international legal regime. 
8. At the same time, when we know generally what the rules and their 
enforcement machinery will be like in the international zone, delineate spe- 
cifically and finally the boundary between the Treaty Continental Shelf and 
the international area. 
9. Throughout this process, not in an arrogant spirit but as a realistic rec- 
ognition of the capacity of the United States in international negotiations, 
keep in mind the strong bargaining position of the U.S. : 
—Without Agreement, there can be no new detailed international 
legal regime; 
26-563 O—70—pt. 2——5 
