The Russians come fishing

Pim Opinion

As the Pacific becomes steadily more important in the conduct of world affairs, it behoves the small island nations to take even more care to avoid being used as pawns in the global power game.

Kiribati, quite innocently and sincerely, wishes to make the best of its main, indeed almost its only, real economic asset, the fish swarming through the immense area of ocean encompassed by its exclusive economic zone. With this in mind, Kiribati has been negotiating with the Soviet Union about a licensing agreement under which the Russian trawlers would have rights to harvest tuna and other species over some five million square kilometres of the Pacific.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with such an arrangement, for the Russians are already one of the five major fishing nations working the Pacific grounds and tuna “highways. ” But it would be better by far if, instead of trotting off to make a bilateral deal with a superpower which quite obviously has all sorts of fish to fry in the Pacific, quite aside from the finny ones it can catch in its nets, Kiribati joined in the cry for what would mean, in effect, control of most of the Pacific’s richest fishing areas by the island countries, working together, through the South Pacific Forum.

Then licences could be issued to all the major fishing countries the U.S., Russia, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea on a proper commercial basis, and with much less chance of global political rivalries becoming involved.

Adequate fees could be charged for the licences, say about US$25 million a year, and this money could be used to fund, at least partly, the operation of an international surveillance system to which all the island countries could contribute what their economies, and their share of the fish cake, allowed. It would be easy enough, for example, to issue licence-holders with electronic transponders for the duration of their paid-up fishing season so that patrolling aircraft could readily identify those vessels legally in the area, and those which were not.

Income for the national economies of the island countries could then be derived by levying five or seven per cent of the sale price of each ship’s catch. That, too, should be easily enough policed.

But if the island countries allow themselves to be carved up by the bigger nations, then confusion will reign. Out of confusion will come rivalry and, possibly, disorder and disagreement. Out of disagreement might come the siding of one country against another, and the reaching for support from one of the bigger countries involved. And thus might the many lessons of history be again ignored.

Experts who have made a close study of Pacific fisheries say there is now pressing need for a universal treaty to control the industry, to make sure fish stocks are not wiped out by rapacious trawling, and to ensure that 200-mile zones are not violated and opportunities for income lost to small nations which badly need the money.

Last month representatives of 14 Pacific nations met in Port Moresby to tackle, specifically the United States, but also, by implication, all other involved nations on the frequently angry question of access to fishing grounds within the 200-mile exclusive economic zones claimed by each island nation. So little has come out of that meeting, laymen may be excused for wondering why it was held at all. More interested observers are wondering why the islands tarry it can only be to their disadvantage.

About the same time representatives of the Soviet Union were sitting around a table in Sydney with delegates from Kiribati, talking about fishing rights. No agreement was reached on how much the Russians should pay, nor how wide their rights should be. The parties agreed to consult with their respective head offices and talk further by telex. Unfortunately, as we write, electronic communication between Moscow and Tarawa had not been effected and, therefore, no final agreement had been reached.

Similarly, about the only visible result of the Fort Moresby talkfest seems to have been the lifting of the somewhat unfortunate mandatory American ban on Solomon Islands tuna products imposed after the U.S. purse seine boat Jeanette Diana was dramatically captured by a chartered patrol boat working out of Honiara. The Americans retrieved their boat by paying the Solomons about US$7OO,OOO for it.

The U.S. has thus paid a fine for being caught at something to which their trawlermen still insist on demanding right. Nothing else seems to have changed and, failing some proper international agreement, is unlikely to change, especially given the general attitude of the American Tuna Boat Association, which among some island folk, is rated in between Captain Henry Morgan and a bad case of eczema.

The Americans should not feel too badly about that description since very little warmer regard is felt in the Pacific for the activities of fishing vessels from the Soviet Union, Taiwan, Japan or South Korea. The Japanese have made some efforts to cooperate with the island countries by setting up the occasional joint venture in, for example, Fiji and Vanuatu, but, in general, control over fishing and fishing grounds has caused more argument than amity and probably will go on doing so until a workable agreement is reached.

A system is needed which provides income, on a proper and equitable basis, for the island countries. In other words a system by which they are not ripped off.

Machinery already exists by which the Pacific nations in general could come together on this important matter. The South Pacific Forum could give a lead by offering the services of its Fisheries Agency to all the countries. Australia and New Zealand could act as good neighbors by offering to help with surveillance of the vast areas of ocean across which the trawlers and the tuna boats range.

The bigger island countries, like Fiji and Papua New Guinea, could contribute their naval ships to the effort, and probably also helicopters for closer inshore patrols. In fact, the island navies could earn their keep, or at least part of it.

Experts in the field of Pacific fisheries say that it should not be too difficult to earn an aggregate income of at least $2OO million from the five major fishing nations by way of licence fees and levies. This, distributed among the island nations, would provide a very real input to their national economies, at very little cost to themselves.

But if each of the small countries tries to go its own way, confusion could develop and the return would likely be far less than it could be from one of the few major industrial assets the Pacific countries possess in common.

The need now is for Pacific leaders to reach agreement on this vital issue so that a uniform and united approach may be made to the big nations. As Gulliver discovered in Lilliput, singleness of purpose makes the small very strong.