319 
Soviet continental shelf offer leverage to the Soviet Union due to 
their control over these areas, thus facilitating gestures of ‘‘good- 
neighborship” on the part of the Soviets. The initial approach to 
a solution of the problem has been procedural, rather than substantive, 
in nature. Yet, this recent agreement at least lays the foundation 
upon which further negotiations could build. The establishment of 
claims settlement commissions provides yet another forum for discus- 
sion of fisheries problems and the exchange of information. The con- 
duct of bilateral fishing relations does affect the development of bi- 
lateral relations in general. 
As initiated by the Soviets in 1956, the concept of joint fisheries 
regulations has limited the uncontrolled expansion of fishing operations 
in the Northwest Pacific. The duration of the annual negotiations 
conducted by the Soviet-Japanese Fisheries Commission depends upon 
the degree of rigidity in the bargaining stance of each party shaped 
by political and economic factors. While the focus is on the salmon, 
herring, and crab resources in these waters, the territorial dispute 
and the issue of safe fishing operations, in the setting of the Asian 
power configuration undoubtedly influence the outcome of the annual 
fisheries talks. At the same time, the reduction in harvest quotas 
and the establishment of joint breeding projects illustrate a recognized 
concern over the conservation of resources and the concomitant need 
to increase the supply. The annual meetings of this regulatory body 
and the ministerial conferences have contributed to the development 
of bilateral fisheries relations. 
On balance, the Soviet Union appears to have an advantage over 
Japan in the fisheries issue in that it can limit access to traditional 
Japanese fishing grounds. Secondly, a large-scale Soviet fishing opera- 
tion just beyond the 3-mile Japanese territorial sea has been at the 
expense of the Japanese fisherman. Competition in these waters has 
resulted inevitably in gear conflict, thus raising the issue of safe fishing 
operations. However, the possible extension of Japanese coastal waters 
to a 12-mile limit could diminish the potential for conflict by affording 
its nationals a greater expanse of the sea, thus placing the Soviets 
at a greater distance. Also, Peking’s support of Japan may strengthen 
the latter’s position vis-a-vis the Soviet Union by adjusting the power 
alignment. Nonetheless, as past experience has shown, the Soviet 
Union will continue to exert a dominant influence in bilateral fishing 
relations at least in the immediate future. 
As stated at the beginning, an analysis of the Soviet-Japanese fishe- 
ries issue cannot be separated from the broader spectrum of general 
political and economic relations. Since 1956, the development of bi- 
lateral relations has strongly influenced the progress of the fisheries 
issue and vice versa. Improvements in the fisheries relationship have 
contributed to the advancement of bilateral relations in general. The 
development of bilateral fishing relations has witnessed some degree 
of progress and has provided a basis of mutual understanding. The 
problems have been recognized. It remains to be seen whether the 
problematic issues will continue to strain bilateral relations or whether 
improvements in the general atmosphere will promote their resolution. 
However, joint efforts have achieved a degree of cooperation in 
maritime matters in a movement away from conflict. And, the con- 
tinuation of fisheries negotiations on various levels illustrates the in- 
