VZCZCXYZ1649
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #1138/01 3530005
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 190005Z DEC 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7864
INFO RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 1218
RUEHCO/AMEMBASSY COTONOU 0159
RUEHKG/AMEMBASSY KINGSTON 0290
RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM 0658
RUEHSV/AMEMBASSY SUVA 0468

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001138 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL AORC UNGA
SUBJECT: GENERAL ASSEMBLY DEBATES/ADOPTS RESOLUTIONS ON 
FISHERIES AND OCEANS AND LAW OF THE SEA 
 
REF: A. A. STATE 122954 
     ¶B. B. STATE 122687 
 
¶1.   Summary:  On December 4, the General Assembly debated 
agenda items 76a: Oceans and the law of the sea and 76b: 
Sustainable fisheries, with over 42 Member States addressing 
the Assembly.  Interventions focused mainly on combating 
piracy; stopping illegal, unregulated, and unreported (IUU) 
fishing; promoting the U.N. Convention on Oceans and Law of 
the Sea, and finding a solution to the increased workload of 
the Commission on the Continental Shelf.  At the conclusion 
of the debate, resolution A/64/L.18 Corr. 1, Oceans and the 
law of the sea, was adopted by a vote of 120 in favor, 1 
against (Turkey), and 3 abstentions (El Salvador, Colombia, 
and Venezuela).  Resolution A/64/L.29, Sustainable Fisheries, 
was adopted without a vote.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  The General Debate began with the United States 
introducing resolution A/64/L.29, Sustainable Fisheries. (The 
negotiations of this resolution were once again expertly 
facilitated by Holly Koehler of OES.)  The United States 
focused on the resolution's package bottom fisheries 
provisions, stressing that urgent action was still needed in 
this area.  The U.S. statement also addressed the importance 
of regional fisheries management organizations in regulating 
international fisheries and ensuring the sustainability of 
global fish stocks. 
 
¶3.  Brazil introduced resolution A/64/L.18 Corr.1, Oceans and 
the law of the sea focusing on capacity building; the 
workload of the Continental Shelf Commission; maritime 
safety; and acidification of oceans.  It highlighted the 
importance of the U.N. Convention on Oceans and Law of the 
Sea (UNCLOS) and commended the efforts of the Division of 
Oceans and Law of the Sea of the Office of Legal Affairs 
(DOALOS). 
 
- - - - - - - - - 
REGIONAL GROUPS 
- - - - - - - - - 
 
¶4.  Sweden, on behalf of the European Union, addressed a wide 
range of issues, including freedom of navigation, piracy, the 
declining quality of the marine environment, the UN informal 
consultative process, the workload of the Continental Shelf 
Commission, the fisheries resolution's provisions on bottom 
fishing and the need for a binding agreement on port state 
control with respect to the regulation of illegal, 
unregulated and unreported fishing. . The EU noted that it 
would have wished to highlight the state of the Arctic region 
as a priority area for climate change research and to 
reference the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change 
Conference in Copenhagen.  Sweden also commented on the size 
of the Oceans resolution (148 operative paragraphs) stating 
that it would be in favor of shortening the resolution in the 
future. 
 
¶5.  Benin, representing the African Group, commented that the 
principles espoused in the two texts would be meaningless if 
real efforts were not made to involve all States 
(particularly African coastal States).  It observed that 
small African States are generally powerless when large 
companies exploit their maritime natural resources, noting 
that "if nothing is done soon, the law of the sea could 
become the law of the jungle."  The African Group requested 
technical assistance and capacity building to give coastal 
States the ability to patrol and maintain their coasts and 
urged Member States to contribute to the Trust Fund.  Benin 
closed by expressing its concern for the workload of the 
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf as many 
States would not be able to meet its deadlines. 
 
¶6.  Jamaica, on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), 
said it was firmly committed to the protection and 
preservation of the Caribbean Sea.  It advocated for the 
conduct of marine scientific research and welcomed the 
revision of the guide on marine scientific research.  CARICOM 
supported the Commission on the Limits of the Continental 
Shelf and commended the work of the International Seabed 
Authority. 
 
¶7.  Nauru, representing the Pacific Small Island Developing 
States (PSIDS) recognized the negative impacts of IUU and 
bottom trawling.  It acknowledged the PSIDS's lack of 
technical expertise and minimal capacity to enforce and 
report illegal activities.  Nauru called for expediting new 
Regional Fisheries 
Management Organizations (RFMO) to fill any gaps between the 
 
 
North and South Pacific. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
COMMON THEMES AND NOTABLE REMARKS 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶8.  Throughout the debate, many delegations touched upon 
common themes.  Most Member States expressed support for the 
International Seabed Authority, the International Tribunal 
for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), and the U.N. Convention for 
the Law of the Sea (the Convention).  Numerous delegations 
(Kuwait, Norway, Singapore, Canada, and Japan) called for 
more action against piracy, with Ukraine focusing its 
intervention exclusively on the subject.  Similarly, most 
delegations opposed IUU fishing practices. 
 
¶9.  Many delegations expressed great concern about the 
workload of the Continental Shelf Commission noting the very 
long timelines for consideration of their submissions, with 
Sri Lanka noting that some recommendations might not be 
finalized until 2040. Many delegations welcomed the decision 
of the 19th meeting of States Parties to the Law of the Sea 
Convention to establish an informal working group to continue 
to consider ways to address this issue at next year's States 
Parties meeting. 
 
¶10.  Malta suggested adding trafficking in persons, safety 
and security of navigation and transportation of weapons of 
mass discussion to the Convention.  Tanzania recommended 
expanding the ambit of the International Criminal Court to 
include piracy and suggested an international conference 
under the United Nations to examine piracy. 
 
¶11.  Singapore commented that the Convention is an 
indivisible package, stating that "we should not extract 
paragraphs from the Convention out of context, nor misuse 
certain provisions in an attempt to justify measures that are 
inconsistent with the Convention." 
 
¶12.  Many delegations thanked Holly Koehler for her able 
facilitation of the sustainable fisheries resolution 
negotiation. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - 
OBSERVER MISSIONS 
- - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶13.  Nii Allotey Odunton, Secretary-General of the 
International Seabed Authority, commended the progress on 
finalizing regulations for prospecting and exploration for 
polymetallic sulphides.  Odunton commented that the lack of 
data on the deep sea continued to be a problem and that the 
Authority was working with States to standardize and share 
credible data. 
 
¶14.  Harlan Cohen from the International Union for 
Conservation of Nature called for a cumulative approach to 
address the management of the marine environment, noting that 
17,000 species are threatened, including 32 percent of open 
ocean sharks and rays.  The Union was concerned that a quota 
agreed to on blue fin tuna for 2010 was much higher than 
recommended by the scientific advisory body.  He recommended 
the creation of networks of marine protected areas. 
 
¶15.  Jose Luis Jesus, President of the ITLOS, welcomed Chad, 
the Dominican Republic, and Switzerland for becoming the 
newest States party to the Convention.  He updated the 
Assembly on the work of the Special Chamber and capacity 
building efforts in the Southern Africa region. He encouraged 
States Parties to make a declaration, under article 287 of 
the Convention, choosing ITLOS as their preferred forum for 
the settlement of disputes.  Jesus also noted that bilateral 
agreements related to the law of the sea may include 
provisions conferring jurisdiction on ITLOS. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - 
RESOLUTION ACTION 
- - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶16.  Following the debate, the Assembly took action on the 
oceans resolution.  Before the vote, Singapore explained its 
affirmative vote stating that operative paragraph 46 left 
silent the fact that the consideration by the Continental 
Shelf Commission are without prejudice to other entities, 
such as ITLOS and the International Court of Justice. 
Venezuela, in explaining its abstention, said that the 
Convention is not the only source of the law of the sea, and 
that it is not customary international law except to the 
extent that it has been incorporated into its domestic 
legislation. .  The Secretariat then explained that the 
resolution contained no program budget implications. The 
Assembly then voted on the resolution with 120 in favor, 1 
against (Turkey), and 3 abstentions (Venezuela, Colombia, and 
El Salvador). 
 
¶17.  The General Assembly then moved to the draft sustainable 
fisheries resolution and adopted it without a vote. 
Argentina, while explaining its position, noted that General 
Assembly resolutions were not binding and that States not 
parties to the fish stocks agreement were not bound by its 
terms.  It also noted that international law did not allow 
regional fisheries management organizations to impose 
measures on ships whose flags were from States not members of 
those organizations.  Finally, Argentina said that the 
sustainable fisheries resolutions' provisions on bottom 
fishing cannot affect the sovereign rights of coastal States 
over their continental shelf in accordance with international 
law. Turkey then took the floor to state it was not a 
co-sponsor of the oceans resolution (the first draft that was 
circulated erroneously listed Turkey as a co-sponsor) and 
that Turkey was not party to the Convention as it did not 
provide sufficient safeguards for special geographical 
situations or special circumstances.  Thus, Turkey could not 
accept a resolution that calls on States to become a party to 
the Convention.  In reference to the fisheries resolution, 
Turkey supported the resolution but disassociated itself from 
any references to international instruments to which it is 
not party.  Finally, Venezuela explained that it held similar 
reservations to the fisheries resolution regarding the fish 
stocks agreement as it did for oceans resolution regarding 
the Convention. 
RICE