Page images

with which data are exchanged and there are times when we have wondered why this has been so slow in coming from the Soviets. We have concluded that much of the difficulty relates to housekeeping problems in the U.S.S.R.

SUPPORT OF COUNCIL INITIATIVES BY MARINE SCIENCES COMMISSION If I could, may I comment on your earlier question, and with the Chair's permission, submit for the record a letter which the Chairman of the Commission, Dr. Stratton wrote to the Vice President. I believe a copy was made available to the committee informally some weeks ago, in which Dr. Stratton indicated the Commission had reviewed the Council's proposals for this current fiscal year now before the Congress and in general had found them not inconsistent with any of the broader objectives and longer range goals that the Commission is working on.

We thought this was necessary not just with regard to the decade but to all proposals to make sure that we were not headed in one direction and then at a very early date when you receive the Commission report, would find this to be the wrong one. Thus, we invited Commission comment and we are pleased to receive it. I don't believe that letter has ever been released, but we have Dr. Stratton's and the Vice President's permission to do that.

Mr. LENNON. Would the gentleman yield ? Thank you.
You furnished that for the committee, did you not?
Dr. WENK. Yes, sir, I did. It was never made public.

Mr. LENNON. What is the approximate date, Dr. Wenk; do you know?

Dr. WENK. February, as I recall.

Mr. LENNON. And this was one of the points, that I wanted to develop. I don't want to find ourselves when we get the Commission report in January of next year in a state of turbulence with respect to what may be projected for the International Decade. If it is contrary to the Commission's long-range objective, why, we would be in trouble. I would ask permission of the committee, if counsel would secure that letter and insert it into the record following the request by the gentleman from California, Mr. Reinecke. (The letter follows:) COMMISSION ON MARINE SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND RESOURCES,

Washington, D.C., February 19, 1968. The VICE PRESIDENT, United States Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. VICE PRESIDENT: The Commission on Marine Science, Engineering and Resources, has reviewed the President's Second Annual Report to the Congress on Marine Resources and Engineering Development, and the members have asked me to convey to you our support for the proposed program. As you are aware, the Commission itself has a little time to go before firming up its own conclusions, but we have found nothing in the draft of this report with which we would at this time take exception. More importantly, we recognize that action taken now to strengthen our marine science programs will enhance the nation's capabilities to act effectively upon recommendations which the Commission may later advance, and that it would be most unwise to defer soundly justified programs pending issuance of the Commission's report.

With our deepest thanks for your own support and the continued cooperation of the Council, Sincerely yours,

J. A. STRATTON, Chairman.

MARCH 5, 1968. Dr. JULIUS A. STRATTON, Chairman of the Board, Ford Foundation, New York, N.Y.

DEAR DR. STRATTON : May I express my deep appreciation and that of all members of the Marine Sciences Council for your recent letter supporting the President's program for Fiscal Year 1969.

It is indeed gratifying to learn that our steps during the next year are compatible with your present estimate of needs and opportunities and, at this point in time, consistent with your longer range perspective. Indeed, your support may be of considerable assistance if questions arise in the Congress as to whether increases in funding proposed for this year should be deferred until after your Commission submits its report. Please convey our gratitude to all of your colleagues. Sincerely,



Mr. REINECKE. Dr. Wenk, you indicated, that you estimate that the U.S. involvement will be approximately 20 oceanographic vessels into the Decade activity. Will this be 20 vessels in addition to what we have at the present time?

Dr. WENK. Mr. Reinecke, this would be about 20 ship years annually using present vessels. In other words, if the Decade were switched on tomorrow, the equivalent of about 20 of our roughly 100 oceanographic vessels would be devoted to activities relevant to the goals of the Decade.

Mr. REINECKE. What would happen to the missions that those ships are presently assigned to?

Dr. WENK. Many of these would be exactly the same. What we have characterized as involving Decade activities are either unilateral activities where the data are contributed to a world data bank, or international activities that are planned collaboratively. There are several such expeditions already being planned, through the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, which Mr. Pollack mentioned earlier. These would be folded into the Decade in a more significant manner than they would have been previously, project by project.


Mr. REINECKE. The question which bothers me is that in your letter dated June 15 to the Vice President you indicate:

In each city, I urged that all nations participating in the Decade support the concept at forthcoming meetings including the meeting of the U.N. Ad Hoc Committee on the Seabed.

How do you relate the Decade to the ad hoc committee's activity coming forth from the Maltese discussions last fall? It seems to me that you are generating an equivalence here that I don't like.

Mr. POLLACK. One of the working groups of the ad hoc committee, the economic and technical working group devoted the preponderant part of its session in June to a systematic analysis of the state of knowledge regarding the seabed and the ocean floor and largely, I think, demonstrated the necessity for the kind of program that the Decade contemplates. Their examination will provide the basis for the general assembly, in its meeting this fall, to consider with some insight and understanding a recommendation that the general assembly endorse the concept of an expanded program of international cooperation for the acquisition of information on the oceans. I don't see that there is any conflict.

Mr. REINECKE. Then the adoption of this resolution would in fact be adopting a portion of the work of the ad hoc committee which is fundamentally working on the Malta resolution, right?

Mr. POLLACK. You could consider that if the resolution were adopted, part of the basis for the resolution would have arisen out of the deliberations of the ad hoc committee. I think you are right.

Mr. REINECKE. I am concerned because people might read into this a complete adoption of the work of the ad hoc committee and I am not ready to go that far, .

Mr. POLLACK. I don't believe that would be a legitimate conclusion.

Mr. REINECKE. Then may I cite Mr. Popper's paper presented to us last September before the subcommittee that we were meeting with where he assured the subcommittee that we do not intend in the course of this consideration of this subject in the general assembly-we have made no agreement disclosed or undisclosed; but again in June of 1968, according to the statement which Senator Pell put in the record, Mr. Popper goes on at great length about the activities and that the U.S. delegation to the U.N. is working very hard at trying to construct a similar treaty to the Outer Space Treaty. He and Mr. Meeker together it appears to me are working very

hard to generate a parallel concept here where you are talking about vesting the authority of the ocean floor in the United Nations.

Mr. POLLACK. There are a number of things that are taking place in a parallel manner at the U.N.

Another working group of the ad hoc committee is the legal working group. That is the working group which has been considering the statement at its joint meeting with the House Foreign Affairs Committee the other day. A resolution adopted by the general assembly in support of the International Decade of Ocean Exploration or the adoption by the Congress of the concurrent resolution that is being considered here today would I think have absolutely no effect whatsoever upon the general question of the regime or location of the boundary line or the other legal considerations that are involved except over a period of time to provide a basis for more intelligent, wise understanding of the issues that are involved that are going to ultimately require legal determinations.

In the absence of the Decade or some comparable program for better understanding of the environment we are dealing with I personally find it very difficult to envisage very much intelligent movement on the part of the international community with respect to some of the basic political and legal questions that are involved.

Mr. REINECKE. I fully support the concept of the Decade in its ideal form as it has been presented here, but I think by the time it goes through a few committees of the United Nations, it is going to look an awful lot like an adjunct to the workings of the ad hoc committee which are principally concerned with a regime to control the floor of the ocean.

Mr. POLLACK. I hope that your concern proves not to be justified.

Mr. REINECKE. I hope so, too, but I am looking for more than just hope in this case.

Mr. LENNON. Will the gentleman yield at that point?
Mr. REINECKE. I yield.


Mr. LENNON. Thank you. A person who has been identified only as a key governmental spokesman stated that it was his view that the IDOE was a mechanism designed to sidestep some of the basic questions regarding control of the deep ocean resources that were raised by the Malta proposals to the United Nations last year. Would you gentlemen comment on that?

I am sure you can't identify him by name and by station or by position in the Government, but he is quoted as saying that it was his view that IDOE was a mechanism to sidestep some of the basic questions regarding control of the deep oceans raised by the Malta proposal to the United Nations last fall. I don't say I disagree that is the objective of it, but I would just like to have you gentlemen comment on it.

Dr. WENK. I don't believe the quotation is from either of the two witnesses appearing before you this morning.

Mr. LENNON. I am sure of that.


Dr. WENK. Let me, if I may, elaborate on one aspect of that and come back to a point Mr. Reinecke raised.

First the United States took seriously the preamble to this legislation that established the Council—in terms of seeking to utilize the benefits of the oceans for all mankind.

Moreover, we took note of the fact that unique among the objectives of your act, you call attention to the Council's role in international cooperation. The result of this has been a collaborative activity between the Council and the State Department from a time very early in the life of the Council to examine the manner in which we could take initiatives ourselves in every international forum including but not exclusively the United Nations,

This concept of a Decade of Ocean Exploration, although it may not ave had those exact words at that time, began to take form before the Malta proposal was introduced, before we had any indication that Malta would submit a proposal, and it was our hope, as a matter of fact, that the United States could go to the U.N. with this initiative.

The Malta proposal caught us by surprise. I would say that the only connection between the Malta proposal and this Decade was that we were better prepared by virtue of having thought through the objectives of this decade earlier for Ambassador Goldberg to make the statements last fall in terms of several but not necessarily closely linked initiatives that we would take at the United Nations.


All along we have said that the Decade would not, and I underscore not, be an activity coordinated by that ad hoc committee. I believe that this is an important point to clarify here with regard to both the point Mr. Reinecke raised, and the one that you have raised, Mr. Chairman. We have looked to the technical, specialized committees of the United Nations--recognizing that there are several, each having to do with pieces of a program, that is the IOC, the FAO, and the WMO—and we have discussed with many other countries and with officers of these international organizations ways of bringing those groups together, but not with the idea that the lead responsibility for this Decade would be vested within that ad hoc committee. Mr. Pollack may wish to comment on this, but I believe that this is a point of view that we have had consistently and one that I would like to underscore because it may meet what could otherwise be a serious concern on the part of you gentlemen.

Mr. POLLACK. I will confirm that.

I had said, I think, earlier in my testimony, that the resolution that we contemplated might be introduced would probably invite the nations of the world to submit for coordination and review probably to the IOC their proposals for activities to be carried on under the Decade.

I would also take this opportunity to substantiate that the concept of the Decade preceded the first exposure of the problem of the seabeds in the U.N. by the Pardo Maltese proposal. The only correction I think I might make to Mr. Wenk's statement that the Maltese proposal caught us by surprise is that it would be more proper to say that the only thing that surprised us was that it was the Maltese that made it. We understood enough about the sense of the times to anticipate that the question was about to emerge into daylight at some point last summer in the U.N.

The thing that we did not know was that the Maltese were the people that were going to, so to speak, spring the subject.

Mr. REINECKE. I would like to think that it would be pursued in committees otherwise but I am sort of at a loss to understand why Mr. Popper took most of his statement before the ad hoc committee to explain the Decade concept and urge its support. If we are going to go through other committees, why did we go to the ad hoc committee to sell it?

Mr. POLLACK. The program we adopted under the Department of State pursuant to the instruction of the President to consult with other nations was to consult in every forum that became available to us. Now, having at the point of the meeting of the ad hoc committee already consulted with the Bureau and Consultative Counsel of the IOC, having already consulted with the Fisheries Committee of the FAO, having gone into a variety of bilateral conversations on this subject, it seemed to us that here was an audience that you simply could not ignore in telling the U.S. story. We felt that we needed to take advantage of the meeting of this group to explain the concept and our then current understanding of the Decade.

Mr. REINECKE. I can understand that, but I don't see how you can use this as a place to sell it and then turn around and say, "We don't

" want the ad hoc committee to have anything to do with it.” I understand what you are saying, but I question that.

Mr. LENNON. Would the gentleman yield at that point? Thank you. Don't you suppose that you are using a forum with the countries who would be particular members of the international decade to have an opportunity to turn from the direction of the Malta resolution along the line of an international decade? I want to believe that.


« PreviousContinue »