(c) crown copyright
Catalogue Reference:CAB/129/92
Image Reference:0002
(TlilS D O C U M E N T
IS T H E
C.(58)
PROPERTY
OF HER
BRITANNIC
MAJESTY'S
52
GOVERNMENT)
COFY
25th F e b r u a r y ,
N.
1953
CABINET
TERRITORIAL
Memorandum
WATERS
b y t h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e l o r Foreign
Affairs On 18th F e b r u a r y t h e A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l w a s i n v i t e d t o
report further to the Cabinet about the possible c o m p r o m i s e s on
t h e l i m i t s of t e r r i t o r i a l w a t e r s ( C . C . ( 5 £ ) 17th C o n c l u s i o n s , M i n u t e
I a t t a c h a c o p y of a r e p o r t s e n t b y t h e A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l
from
Geneva.
2.
I i n v i t e t h e a t t e n t i o n of m y c o l l e a g u e s t o t h e
General's
statement that a decision
is n e c e s s a r y
S.L..
Foreign
Office,
S . W . 1.
25th F e b r u a r y ,
1958
CONFIDENTIAL Attorney­
soon.
5).
TERRITORIAL,
WATERS
Foreign Secretary from
the
Attorney-General
I think you m a y like to have a report
of toclay's
events.
2.
Soon after m y a r r i v a l this morning the A m e r i c a n s c a m e to see
m e , a n d I h a d a l o n g t a l k w i t h t h e m a n d P r o f e s s o r B a i l e y of A u s t r a l i a .
T h e A m e r i c a n d e l e g a t i o n i s l e d b y D e a n , a m e m b e r of D u l l e s ' l a w f i r m .
I m e t h i m i n D a l l a s v / h e n I w a s a g u e s t of t h e A m e r i c a n B a r A s s o c i a t i o n
a n d a l s o in L o n d o n t h i s y e a r , a n d t h i s m a y p r o v e u s e f u l b u t S a u n d e r s
of t h e S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t i s o b v i o u s l y t h e r e a l p o w e r in t h e i r t e a m .
3,
T h e y p r o p o s e t o put u p a big fight for t h e r e t e n t i o n of t h e
three­
m i l e l i m i t a n d t o s e c u r e t h a t t h e y a r e p r e p a r e d if n e c e s s a r y t o a g r e e
to exclusive fishing
rights up to twelve m i l e s .
Their fishing interests
would be injured to s o m e extent but t h e y a r e p r e p a r e d to pay this p r i c e .
T h e y s a y t h e y a r e c o m p l e t e l y o p p o s e d t o a n y e x t e n s i o n of t h e t h r e e ­
mile limit; that extension to six m i l e s would close the Aegian Sea and
l a r g e a r e a s of t h e P a c i f i c ; t h a t in w a r t i m e t h e s i x m i l e s of t e r r i t o r i a l
s e a of a n e u t r a l m i g h t p r o v e m o s t e m b a r r a s s i n g .
T h e y w a n t , if p o s s i b l e ,
t h e f i s h e r i e s q u e s t i o n t o b e c o n s i d e r e d a l o n g w i t h , if n o t b e f o r e t h e
b r e a d t h of t h e t e r r i t o r i a l w a t e r s .
T f e e l t h a t it i s m o s t d e s i r a b l e
that the latter question should be postponed, and I would like to s e e
if a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u t i o n of t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n of f i s h e r i e s p r o b l e m c o u l d
be secured first.
If i t c o u l d , t h i s m i g h t r e d u c e t h e p r e s s u r e f o r
exclusive fishing up to twelve miles and also the p r e s s u r e for extending
territorial waters.
T h e difficulty is that the C o m m i s s i o n s r e p o r t on
c o n s e r v a t i o n i s n o t s a t i s f a c t o r y t o u s a s it w o u l d e n a b l e a c o a s t a l S t a t e
t o i m p o s e r e s t r i c t i o n s w h i c h would be in f o r c e until a n a r b i t r a r y
tribunal had decided to the contrary.
V/e a r e t r y i n g t o w o r k out a n
a l t e r n a t i v e p r o c e d u r e w h e r e b y a c o a s t a l S t a t e c a n in c a s e of u r g e n c y
on a n e x p a r t e a p p l i c a t i o n g e t c o n s e n t of a t r i b u n a l t o t h e i m m e d i a t e
i m p o s i t i o n of r e s t r i c t i o n s .
E v e n if w e s u c c e e d i n t h i s it w i l l b e l e s s
satisfactory to the coastal States than the C o m m i s s i o n ^ report, and
w h i l e a s o l u t i o n of t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n p r o b l e m m i g h t s a t i s f y s o m e it is
n o t t h o u g h t b y S a u n d e r s o r b y B a i l e y t h a t it w o u l d s a t i s f y t h e m a j o r i t y
of t h o s e w a n t i n g e x c l u s i v e f i s h e r y r i g h t s .
4.
The Americans
feel a s w e do that t h e r e
is a v e r y r e a l r i s k
that
the conference will reject the t h r e e - m i l e limit and either accept
twelve m i l e s or acaept what I hear India is likely to p r o p o s e , that
individual States can select the limit they like up to twelve m i l e s .
This to m y mind is just the twelve-mile
limit d r e s s e d up to look
more attractive.
5.
The A m e r i c a n s also recognise that there is a real risk that
the conference m a y a g r e e to exclusive fishing for twelve m i l e s , and
at t h e s a m e t i m e not a g r e e t o t h e r e t e n t i o n of t h e t h r e e - m i l e l i m i t ,
I s t r e s s e d t h e d a n g e r t h a t s e p a r a t i o n of f i s h i n g r i p h t s f r o m t e r r i t o r i a l
w a t e r s m i g h t m a k e it e a s y s u b s e q u e n t l y t o e x t e n d t h e e x c l u s i v e f i s h i n g
rights, and also that with fishing rights added to contiguous zone rights
it m i g h t p a v e t h e w a y t o t r e a t i n g t h e t w e l v e m i l e s in a few y e a r s ' t i m e a s
territorial.
T h e y felt t h e y c o u l d r e s i s t t h e l a t t e r if t h e y c o u l d g e t t h e
confsr^nce to affirm the t h r e e - m i l e principle, but from what I have heard
t o d a y it s e e m s t o m e m o s t u n l i k e l y t h a t t h e c o n f e r e n c e w i l l a g r e e t o it.
-1-
CONFiDENTSAL
6.
fishing
If w e s u p p o r t t h e A m e r i c a n s
rights to twelve miles
i n p a y i n g t h e p r i c e of
in o r d e r to retain the
exclusive
three-mile
l i m i t t h e c h a n c e s of its a c c e p t a n c e w o u l d I e x p e c t b e i m p r o v e d .
w h e n it i s c l e a r t h a t t h e t h r e e - m i l e
limit by itself will not be
and clear that we cannot block its rejection,
propose
six milesthen,without
twelve miles
being accepted
is
American
on our own
If
we,
accepted
account
support, the likelihood
of
increased.
7.
I a m inclined to the view that we should not a g r e e to any
exclusive fishing rights outside t e r r i t o r i a l w a t e r s .
If w e d o n o t a g r e e ,
despite what other nations a g r e e as to that, we can at least challenge
any claim to such rights before the International Court.
C.
I t h i n k it i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t t h e C a b i n e t s h o u l d d e c i d e s o o n
w h e t h e r w e should go in with t h e A m e r i c a n s and a g r e e to t w e l v e m i l e s
e x c l u s i v e f i s h i n g if t h e t h r e e - m i l e l i m i t i s r e t a i n e d , o r d e c i d e t o t r y
to get the six-mile territorial w a t e r s limit with no
further fishing
rights.
A d e c i s i o n is r e q u i r e d p r e t t y soon a s lobbying for e i t h e r
proposal is required.
So far w e h a v e n o t g i v e n a n y i n d i c a t i o n of t h e
c o u r s e w e w o u l d f o l l o w if, a s i s l i k e l y , t h e c o n f e r e n c e r e j e c t s t h e t h r e e ­
m i i e limit b y itself.
The discussions with the A m e r i c a n s have been
on possible fall-back positions.
I told t h e m that we w e r e completely
w i t h t h e m o n t h e r e t e n t i o n of t h e t h r e e - m i l e l i m i t , a n d t h a t I h o p e d
w e s h o u l d b e a b l e t o a g r e e o n w h a t p o s i t i o n t o t a k e u p if it w a s c l e a r t h a t
that would not be accepted.
9.
B a i l e y (Australia) w a s with us in seeking to r e t a i n a t h r e e ­
m i l e l i m i t , p e s s i m i s t i c a s t o t h e o u t c o m e of t h e c o n f e r e n c e , a n d m y
i m p r e s s i o n was that he was inclined to think that exclusive fishing
r i g h t s u p t o t w e l v e m i l e s w a s t h e b e s t c h a n c e of a v o i d i n g a t w e l v e ­
mile limit to territorial waters.
A u s t r a l i a is a g a i n s t a n e x t e n s i o n
t o s i x m i l e s o n a c c o u n t of t h e n a r r o w s t r a i t s n o r t h - e a s t of A u s t r a l i a .
M y feeling is that it is w o r t h w h i l e putting p r e s s u r e on o u r f r i e n d s
t o g e t s o m e a g r e e m e n t t o s i x m i l e s if t h a t r e a l l y w o u l d b e l e s s
disadvantageous to us than the exclusive fishing rights.
I think the
A m e r i c a n s m i g h t c h a n g e t h e i r p o s i t i o n if t h e y c o u l d b e c o n v i n c e d
t h a t t h e s t r a t e g i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a g a i n s t t h e a d o p t i o n of a s i x - m i l e
limit w e r e not overwhelming.
The Australians might also change their
v i e w if t h e y w e r e a b l e t o s e c u r e s a t i s f a c t o r y r i g h t s of p a s s a g e t h r o u g h
the straits.
10.
The conference started this afternoon with the usual
preliminaries.
D r e w e (Canada) is coming to see m e later tonight
and the Poles and Israel particularly want to see us.
I will send ycu
a d a i l y r e p o r t of t h i s c h a r a c t e r if y o u w o u l d l i k e - n o t s o l o n g a s t h i s
I hope.
I a m hopeful that debate on the territorial w a t e r s b r e a d t h
can be postponed for a bit but delegations a r e taking up t h e i r positions
now, and so a decision a s to the fall-back line is r a t h e r i m p e r a t i v e .
I s h o u l d l i k e t o r e m a i n h e r e t o s e e h o w t h i n g s g o b u t if r e q u i r e d I
c o u l d , of c o u r s e , r e t u r n a n d d i s c u s s t h i s w i t h y o u a n d c o m e b a c k
here again.
11.
Fitjimaurice
and a g r e e s with
(Foreign
Office
it.
Geneva
24th
February,1958
-2CONFIDENTIAL
Legal Adviser)
has
seen
this