This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS ZAGREB 001741 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHSA PBTS PREL SENV HR SI
SUBJECT: CROATIA STRUGGLES TO DECOUPLE FISHING ZONE AND 
MARITIME BOUNDARY 
 
REF: (A) ZAGREB 1077 (B) ZAGREB 1737 
 
SUMMARY AND COMMENT 
------------------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) Croatia,s Fishing and Environmental Protection Zone 
(FEPZ) will enter into force in the Adriatic Sea on October 
¶3.  It will not apply to EU member states, thanks to a 
political concession Croatia made in the run-up to a decision 
on its EU candidate status in June (ref A). Despite GoC 
efforts to decouple the FEPZ from the long-running maritime 
boundary dispute with Slovenia, the October 3 start date -- 
coincidentally also the date of Slovenian Parliamentary 
elections -- comes just as renewed tensions on the maritime 
boundary had begun to settle (ref B). 
 
¶2. (SBU) The FEPZ foreshadows how Adriatic fishing rights 
will be shared once Croatia joins the EU, as EU member states 
enjoy access to each other's fishing zones within negotiated 
quota limits, but neither the FEPZ nor EU accession will help 
solve the maritime boundary problem.  Unfortunately, the 
clear legal distinction between the FEPZ and the maritime 
boundary is lost on most reporters and more than a few 
politicians, making it likely that FEPZ enforcement could 
refuel anxieties on the maritime boundary just as cooler 
heads have begun to prevail. END SUMMARY AND COMMENT. 
 
FISHING ZONE TAKES EFFECT... BUT NOT FOR EU MEMBERS 
--------------------------------------------- ------ 
 
¶3. (SBU) Croatia's Fishing and Environmental Protection Zone 
(FEPZ), which enters into force October 3, 2004, will not 
apply to EU-flagged vessels pending conclusion of a fisheries 
partnership agreement between Croatian and the EU. Under the 
FEPZ regime, Croatia will have authority only to interdict 
non-EU flag vessels fishing in the zone, which according to 
our MFA contacts includes a small number of mostly Korean and 
Japanese-flagged vessels. Italian vessels, the primary cause 
of over-fishing, will not be affected by the FEPZ. 
 
¶4. (SBU) However, Croatia currently has neither immediate 
plans nor capacity to enforce the FEPZ. Commenting on recent 
press reports that Croatia's nascent coast guard will ensure 
enforcement starting on October 3, MFA,s  Head of Department 
for EU Politics told Emboffs September 30 that the FEPZ would 
not be enforced for "some months" after its official start 
date. A special office of the PM will be created to oversee 
enforcement and must first establish clear rules of conduct 
before interdictions can begin. The FEPZ would in no way 
affect innocent passage or the safe passage of military 
vessels. The MFA legal department informed Emboffs the FEPZ 
was fully compliant with Croatia's treaty obligations under 
the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. 
 
¶5. (U) Croatia and Slovenia agreed in 1996 to allow limited 
fishing rights in each other,s territorial waters without 
fear of interdiction. In 2002, both Ministers of Interior 
agreed to a temporary but renewable suspension of 
interdiction of each other,s flagged vessels provided police 
were notified in advance. According to the MFA legal 
department, the GoS informed Croatia in early 2004 that it 
would not be able to renew this non-interdiction agreement 
after EU accession, as fisheries is an exclusive EU 
competence. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Since May 2004, local press has routinely reported 
on Slovenian police interdiction of Croatian-flagged vessels 
and police escorts for Croatian fishing vessels operating 
near the GoC-proposed maritime boundary, irking both sides 
but doing little to explain how fishing rights actually work. 
The MFA and Ministry of Interior are in close contact over 
each interdiction; MFA maintains a map showing logged 
incidents of Slovenian vessels in what are claimed to be 
Croatian territorial waters -- incidents effectively 
following the territo