The Law of the Sea Treaty and Underwater Cultural Resources

1983 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 808-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Watters

The Convention on the Law of the Sea, the culminating document of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, received favorable votes from 130 States in April 1982. The United States voted against approval. Articles 149 and 303, which address archaeological and historical objects found in various ocean zones, are compromise measures with ambiguous texts that are subject to interpretation. Archaeologists generally, not simply underwater archaeologists, should be concerned with these provisions because they could set an unfortunate precedent for future international negotiations involving cultural resources, and because they may apply to inundated prehistoric sites as well as to shipwrecks.

Istoriya ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (11 (109)) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
German Gigolaev

The USA, as well as the USSR, initiated the convocation of the III UN Conference on the Law of the Sea (1973—1982). However, after the Ronald Reagan administration came to the White House, American diplomacy significantly changed its policy toward the Conference, which eventually resulted in US refusal to support the draft Convention on the Law of the Sea, which was worked out during the Conference. This behavior was in line with policy course of the Reagan administration — more aggressive than that of their predecessors. The article considers the American policy regarding Law of the Sea negotiations in the first months of Reagan's presidency, during the Tenth Session of the III UNCLOS.


1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-178 ◽  
Author(s):  

In 1982 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea adopted a treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, that succeeded in resolving the most fundamental questions of the law of the sea in accordance with three basic principles: 1.The rules of the law of the sea must fairly balance the respective interests of all states, notably the competing coastal and maritime interests, in a manner that is generally acceptable.2.Multilateral negotiations on the basis of consensus replace unilateral claims of right as the principal means for determining that balance.3.Compulsory dispute settlement mechanisms should be adopted to interpret, apply, and enforce the balance.


Author(s):  
Franz Neumann

This chapter considers a variety of methods of treating Germany. The main objective of the United Nations in the treatment of Germany is to prevent it from ever again becoming a threat to the security of the world. The problem of securing this objective could be approached through destruction of Germany's industrial potential, destruction of Germany as a political entity, and removal from German society of the causes of aggression. The chapter shows that the first two solutions should be deferred until it is clear that the third alternative proves unworkable. In order to eliminate the causes of aggressiveness in German society, temporary and long-term disabilities should be imposed upon Germany. The chapter also examines the causes of German aggression, the United States' policy toward Germany, short-term measures during the period of military government, conditional measures during the probationary period, and permanent impositions upon Germany.


Worldview ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 11-12
Author(s):  
Ved P. Nanda

When, on April 30. the United States rejected the Law of the Sea Convention, it dealt a blow to its own best interest: the orderly development of rules to govern navigation and exploitation of the oceans.During the last days of an eight-week session of the third United Nations conference on the Law of the Sea, the Third World majority had made a last-ditch effort to obtain U.S. approval of the treaty. The U.S. delegate, James Malone acknowledged that their concessions offered “modest improvements” but also that they failed to satisfy U.S. demands on the mining of highly valued manganese nodules. Whatever hope remained for a consensus on the draft treaty was shattered when the U.S. pressed for a forrnai roll call vote on the final day. Disappointment, frustration, and even shock was registered by many of the assembled delegates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document