should accrue to the people of the Trust Territory and not to the United States. We also indicated our willingness to work with the Micronesians to establish jurisdiction over marine resources out to 200 miles, and to devise institutions for Micronesian management of these resources and insure that benefits derived from their exploitation accrue to the Micronesian people. .

*

*

Press Release USUN-46(77), June 15, 1977.

*

*

On October 18, 1977, Adrian P. Winkel, High Commissioner of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, approved a bill establishing a 200-mile fisheries zone around the islands of Micronesia. The text of the statement issued upon signing the bill follows:

It is with a great sense of pleasure that I have today signed into law House Bill No. 7-287, which creates a new Title 52 of the Trust Territory Code establishing 200-mile fisheries zones around the islands of Micronesia. Development of the fishery resources around Micronesia could become a significant component of the future economic development of the islands. International acceptance of the concept of extended fisheries jurisdiction has provided the peoples of Micronesia with an opportunity to develop, through Micronesian institutions, conservation and management practices which will enable such development to take place. At the same time, I believe that enactment of this legislation provides a unique opportunity for greater cooperation with the United States, and that the objectives of this legislation can best be achieved by these cooperative efforts.

As you know, I forwarded to the Congress of Micronesia on August 15, 1977, a proposed administration bill which dealt with the same issue. Although H.B. 7-287 differs in many respects from the administration bill, it nonetheless preserves concepts seen as essential by the U.S. Government in any such legislation. The jurisdictional content of the law has been of concern to both Micronesians and the United States Government. The provision that Micronesian fisheries jurisdiction may only be exercised to the full extent recognized by international law is, I believe, a most useful concept. It provides for flexibility, especially important at this point in history when international oceans law is undergoing such rapid change, and at the same time protects the interests of both sides. Similarly, the U.S. Government has long recognized that extended fisheries zone legislation would be of most practical benefit if it were implemented through cooperative efforts of our two peoples. H.B. 7-287 provides for development of this cooperation in a meaningful way. The structure of the Micronesian Maritime Authority is uniquely drawn to ensure that the interests of both the Micronesians and the U.S. Government are preserved. Surely, we can work out any potential differences within this body.

Finally, it is of course essential that in extending Micronesian fisheries jurisdiction and establishing new institutions to implement the conservation regime, the basic elements of our relationship under the Trusteeship Agreement must be maintained. Specifically, the

conduct of foreign affairs will be carried out in accordance with Executive Order No. 11021, as amended, and Secretary of the Interior Order No. 2918, as amended. Careful study of the bill by those agencies of the U.S. Government directly affected indicates that this is clearly the import of H.B. 7-287. However, it should be fully understood that approval of this bill is not intended, nor can it be interpreted, as U.S. Government approval for Micronesian bodies to communicate directly with foreign governments. In this regard, I would note that the interrelationship between the "international fisheries agreements" and "foreign fishing agreements" contemplated by the legislation needs to be clarified. It is clear that a "foreign fishing agreement," as defined in the law, is a contractual agreement between private parties. Although a "foreign fishing agreement" would appear to be binding on the Congress of Micronesia, thereby precluding subsequent passage of laws or approval of regulations at variance with terms of the contract, it in no way can obligate either the U.S. Government, the Government of the Trust Territory, or any other foreign government. I would hope that we can work together in the future to clarify this and other related matters.

The U.S. Government undertakes its commitment, consistent with the Trusteeship Agreement and its other obligations, to cooperate fully and expeditiously in implementation of H.B. 7-287. In addition, and aside from those specific aspects of the law which relate to arrangements for cooperation, there will no doubt be a need for additional U.S. technical assistance as well as the possibility of enforcement and surveillance activities. Although not specifically referred to in the law, these are matters which we can discuss at a later time, particularly as to their funding and necessary implementing legislation. We pledge to cooperate fully and look forward to working closely with the peoples of Micronesia to assist in the development of the fishery resources off of their islands.

Journal of the Senate of the Congress of Micronesia. Seventh Congress, First Special Session, HICOM, COM. NO. 7–201 (Oct. 18, 1977).

Portions of House Bill No. 7-287, establishing an exclusive fishery zone, an extended fishery zone, foreign fishing agreements, and international fishery agreements, follow:

Section 53. Exclusive Fishery Zone.

(1) There is hereby established an Exclusive Fishery Zone contiguous to the Territorial Sea. The inner boundary of the Exclusive Fishery Zone of each island or atoll is the seaward boundary of the Territorial Sea, and the outer boundary is a line, every point of which is twelve nautical miles seaward of the nearest point on the baseline as defined in Section 51 of this title.

Section 54. Extended Fishery Zone. There is hereby established an Extended Fishery Zone contiguous to the Exclusive Fisherv Zone. The inner boundary of the Extended Fishery Zone of each island or atoll is the seaward boundary of the Exclusive Fishery Zone, and the outer boundary is a line, every point of which is two hundred nautical miles sea ward of the nearest point on the baseline as defined in Section 51 of this Title. The Government of Micronesia shall have exclusive management, conservation, and regulatory authority over all living resources within the Extended Fishery Zone to the full extent recognized by international law.

Section 152. Foreign fishing agreements.

(1) Each foreign fishing agreement shall acknowledge the exclusive fishery management authority of the Government of Micronesia as set forth in this Title.

(2) In negotiating foreign fishing agreements, the Authority shall seek substantial agreement by the foreign parties to the following terms and conditions:

(b) The foreign party and the owner or operator of any fishing vessel fishing pursuant to such foreign fishing agreements will abide by the agreement that: (i) Any officer authorized to enforce the provisions of this Title shall be permitted to board and search or inspect any vessel at any time and make arrests and seizures provided for in Section 208 of this Title whenever such officer has reasonable cause to believe, as a result of such a search or inspection, that any such vessel or any person has committed an act prohibited by this Title;

(c) The foreign party and the owners or operators of all of the fishing vessels of such party shall not, in any year, exceed such party's allocation of the total allowable level of foreign fishing.

(d) Foreign parties will:

(iii) Abide by the requirement that no foreign fishing will be permitted in the territorial sea and fishery zones of Micronesia after June 30, 1979, without a valid and applicable permit, and that all conditions and restrictions of the permit are complied with.

(3) The total allowable level of foreign fishing, if any, with respect to any fishery subject to the provisions of this Title, shall be that portion of the optimum yield of such fishery which will not be harvested by vessels of Micronesia. (4) After reviewing recommendations by the Micronesian Maritime Authority, the Congress of Micronesia by legislation shall determine the allocation among foreign nations of the total allowable level of foreign fishing which is permitted with respect to any fishery subject to the provisions of this Title. In determining the allocation among nations, the Congress shall take into consideration:

(a) The extent to which vessels of such nations have traditionally fished the particular regulated species;

(b) Whether such nations have cooperated with the Government of Micronesia in, and made substantial contributions to, fishery research and the identification of fishery resources;

(c) Whether such nations have cooperated with the Government of Micronesia in enforcement of the provisions of this Title and the regulations issued under its authority; and

(d) Such other matters as it may deem appropriate.

Section 153. International fishery agreements. An international fishery agreement is an international agreement primarily affecting living resources within the fishery zones of Micronesia. Such agreements will be negotiated and concluded in cooperation between the Administering Authority and the Authority. Prior to the conclusion of such an agreement, the United States shall obtain the concurrence of the Congress of Micronesia by resolution to its terms and provisions to the extent such terms and provisions affect living resources within the fishery zones of Micronesia.

*

Title 52, Code of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.

*

Subsequent to the Honolulu Round Table Conference of May 18-21, 1977, another preliminary Micronesian-U.S. Conference was held in Guam from July 25 through 27, 1977, to discuss the restructuring of the free association relationship between the United States and the Trust

Territory of the Pacific Islands and the resumption of formal negotiations. The text of the Joint Press Statement dated July 25-27, 1977, on behalf of the Micronesian-U.S. Conference, in which the United States proposed a negotiating form including both multilateral and bilateral discussions, appears below:

The Guam July 25-27 Micronesian-United States Conference was attended by representatives of the Congress of Micronesia; the Districts of Kosrae, Ponape, Truk, Yap, the Marshalls-including the Marshall Islands Political Status Commission, and Palau-including the Palau Political Status Commission; the Trust Territory Administration and the United States Government. The Governor of Guam, Ricardo Bordallo, and the Speaker of the Guam Legislature, Joe Ada, delivered welcoming remarks to the conference.

This conference was preceded by an all-Micronesian Conference which took place on Guam July 21-24. The Micronesian participants requested that the proposals which the U.S. had indicated it intended to offer regarding restructuring of the free association relationship and the resumption of formal negotiations be presented.

The U.S. delivered its proposal for a free association arrangement in terms of a two-tier relationship. Under the U.S. proposal, an allMicronesian tier would define authorities and responsibilities of the United States Government that would be uniform with respect to all districts or a group of districts acting jointly. The United States reaffirmed its goal that the Trusteeship be terminated by 1981.

The U.S. proposal involves a negotiating format which would include both multilateral and bilateral discussions. Under the U.S. proposal, multilateral negotiations would focus on those aspects of the relationship with the United States, such as defense, foreign relations and overall elements of the free association status, common to all six districts. The U.S. proposal further envisions bilateral negotiations between the United States and a district or group of districts addressing elements of the free association status which are special or local, such as specific defense matters and, in substantial part, provisions for U.S. financial assistance. Each district would determine its representatives for the multilateral negotiations and would also designate negotiators for the bilateral negotiations. Either function could be delegated by a district to the Congress of Micronesia or to its negotiating commission.

The participants agreed that the U.S. proposals would be carefully reviewed by the Congress of Micronesia during its August 15 Special Session, and by other appropriate entities, with the common objective of facilitating the resumption of negotiations in early fall in a manner satisfactory to the peoples of Micronesia. All the parties further agreed that the U.S. proposal represented an important and realistic step toward the resumption of negotiations, and believe that it could form an acceptable basis for negotiations.

The establishment of a pre-termination 200-mile fisheries jurisdiction was also a subject covered during the Conference. Experts from the several delegations discussed the technical aspects of this subject and possible legislation for establishment of such fisheries

jurisdiction designed to protect the interests of the peoples of Micronesia.

Dept. of State File IO/UNP.

On October 25, 1977, formal negotiations concerning the future political status of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands were resumed on Molokai Island, Hawaii. The negotiations were conducted by representatives of the Congress of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, Palau, and the United States on both a multilateral and bilateral basis. The text of the U.S. press release of October 27, 1977, concerning these negotiations appears below:

Formal negotiations for the future political status of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands resumed on October 25, 1977, on Molokai Island in Hawaii. The negotiations, which lasted three days, were conducted on multilateral and bilateral levels between the Commission on Future Political Status and Transition, representing Kosrae, Yap, Ponape, and Truk; the Marshall Islands Political Status Commission, representing the Marshall Islands; the Palau Political Status Commission, representing Palau; and the Government of the United States. Preceding the formal negotiations, the three Trust Territory negotiating commissions met among themselves on October 23 and 24 and issued a joint statement of their agreement that there should be a post-Trusteeship all-Micronesian entity having only those powers to which all of the districts consent. Opening statements were delivered by Ambassador Peter R. Rosenblatt, the President's Personal Representative for Micronesian Status Negotiations; Senator Bailey Olter, Chairman of the Committee on Future Status; Senator Roman Tmetuchl, Chairman of the Palau Political Status Commission; and Senator Amata Kabua, Chairman of the Marshall Islands Political Status Commission. All of the representatives expressed their satisfaction that formal negotiations have resumed and their confidence that the negotiations would proceed in a constructive manner.

During the multilateral plenary negotiations, a Marshalls/Palau proposal on the nature of a post-Trusteeship entity was introduced along with a Commission on Future Political Status and Transition proposal. The U.S. delegation submitted its thoughts on the relationship between the United States and such an all-Micronesian entity.

The concept of free association was explored in a constructive fashion during several sessions. The subject of U.S.-Micronesian defense arrangements was also considered.

A plenary discussion was held on marine resource issues, including Micronesian participation as members of the United States delegation in forthcoming regional negotiations on marine resource matters. The United States will invite a representative from each of the three Trust Territory commissions to join the U.S. delegation to the forthcoming international meeting in Suva, November 18-25 to discuss the creation of a regional fisheries agency.