Transcript Iceland and Britain – Cod War

Iceland and Britain – Cod War
Kok Yufeng (6)
Lowe Xinhui (11)
4N
Geopolitical Background: Iceland
• location: northern Europe, northwest of UK
• geographic coordinates: 65 00 N, 18 00 W
• area:
– total: 103,000 sq km
– land: 100,250 sq km
– water: 2,750 sq km
• no land boundaries
• coastline: 4970km
• maritime claims:
– territorial sea: 12 nm
– exclusive economic zone: 200 nm
– continental shelf: 200 nm or to the edge of the
continental margin
Geopolitical Background: Iceland
• government type: constitutional republic
• capital: Reykjavik
• legal system: civil law system based on
Danish law; has not accepted compulsory
ICJ jurisdiction
• Part of NATO
Geopolitical Background: Iceland
• capitalistic economy. low unemployment, even
distribution of income.
• economy depends heavily on the fishing industry
– provides 70% of export earnings
– employs 8% of the work force.
• sensitive to declining fish stocks and fluctuating
prices for fish and fish products, aluminum, and
ferrosilicon.
• economy diversifying into manufacturing and
service industries.
– software production, biotech, and financial services
• tourism sector expanding
– increase in ecotourism and whale watching.
• GDP (PPP): $10.26 billion (2005 est)
Geopolitical Background: Britain
• the dominant industrial and maritime
power of the 19th century
• As one of five permanent members of the
UN Security Council, a founding member
of NATO, and of the Commonwealth, the
UK pursues a global approach to foreign
policy
• A member of the EU, it chose to remain
outside the Economic and Monetary Union
for the time being.
Geopolitical Background: Britain
• location: western Europe, northwest of France
• geographic coordinates: 54 00 N, 2 00 W
• area (includes Rockall and Shetland Islands):
– total: 244,820 sq km
– land: 241,590 sq km
– water: 3,230 sq km
• land boundaries:
– total: 360 km  border countries: Ireland 360 km
• coastline: 12429km
• maritime claims:
– territorial sea: 12 nm
– exclusive fishing zone: 200 nm
– continental shelf: as defined in continental shelf orders
or in accordance with agreed upon boundaries
Geopolitical Background: Britain
• government type: constitutional monarchy
• capital: London
• constitution: unwritten; partly statutes,
partly common law and practice
• legal system:
– has nonbinding judicial review of Acts of
Parliament under the Human Rights Act of
1998
– accepts compulsory ICJ jurisdiction, with
reservations
Geopolitical Background: Britain
• leading trading power and financial center
• greatly reduced public ownership
• Agriculture is intensive, highly mechanized
– producing about 60% of food needs with less than 2% of
the labor force.
• large coal, natural gas, and oil reserves accounts
for 10% of GDP
• Services account for the largest proportion of
GDP
• economy is one of the strongest in Europe
– inflation, interest rates, unemployment remain low.
• improvement of education, transport, and health
services, at a cost in higher taxes
• GDP (PPP): $1.867 trillion (2005 est.)
Summary of conflict
• The conflict between Britain and Iceland (more
popularly the “Cod War”) was a series of
confrontations
• The main issue was Iceland’s constant extension
of its fishing zone
• There were two other “wars” of smaller scale one
in 1958 and the other in 1972
• The first Cod War was when Britain was unable to
prevent Iceland from extending its fishing limits
from 4 nautical miles to 12 nautical miles (19 km)
off Iceland's coast
Summary of conflict
• The second one was in 1972,when Iceland
decided to extend its fishing zone from 12
nautical miles to 50 nautical miles.
• The conflict ended up with an agreement
between Iceland and Britain, in which
British fishers were only allowed in certain
areas of the 50 mile zone and that their
annual catch to be no more than 130,000
tons. It expired November 1975
Summary of conflict
• concerned that the cod might follow the pattern of
the Icelandic herring, which during the 1960s
almost disappeared. This decline could have been
prevented by adequate conservation methods.
This prompted conservation efforts by Iceland.
• Thus after having unilaterally extended its fishing
zone, Iceland then announced plans to reduce
over-fishing.
• However, her claims were largely ignored even
though it was brought up to the United Nations
Conference on the Law of the Sea.
Summary of conflict
• In October 1975, with most of its suggestions
ignored and with marine biologists predicting that
if these efforts were ignored there would have
been no cod left by 1980, Iceland decided to
extend its 50 nautical mile zone to 200 nautical
miles.
• This meant that only Icelandic fishermen could
fish in the 200 mile designated area
• A number of countries such as Belgium, France
and Norway, actually complied.
• Britain ignored it and continued to intrude.
Summary of conflict
• In November 1975, the two countries had a
serious disagreement over this new fishing zone
and a confrontation took place.
• Iceland deployed 8 ships, six Coast Guard
vessels and two Polish-built stern trawlers
converted into Coast Guard ships to enforce her
control over fishing rights by forcing British
trawlers to stop fishing.
• Britain deployed a total of twenty-two frigates
(although no more than six to nine frigates at one
time), seven supply ships, nine tug-boats and
three auxiliary ships to protect its 40 fishing
trawlers
Summary of conflict
• When Iceland's Cost Guards acted to enforce
Iceland’s regulations, there were collisions
between the ships from both countries
• Not many shots were fired throughout the seven
month conflict, but several ships were rammed on
both sides, causing damage to the vessels and a
few injuries to the crews. Both sides blamed each
other, leading to more hostility.
• The “war” also consisted of British fishing trawlers
having their nets cut by Icelandic coast guard
Summary of conflict
• Iceland had even threatened closure of the
NATO base at Keflavik, which would, in the
military perception of the time, have
severely impaired NATO's ability to defend
the Atlantic Ocean from Soviet threat.
• This brought United States into the conflict
as it threatened their defense against
Communism.
• Iceland also broke of diplomatic ties with
Britain.
Summary of conflict
• While the United States offered to mediate between
the two parties, it was through NATO intercession, the
conflict was finally resolved in June 2 1976.
• An agreement was signed in which Britain was only
allowed 24 trawlers inside Iceland's fishing zone at any
one time. They also had a limited of fish they could
catch
• Iceland’s patrol vessels could stop to inspect British
trawlers.
• There were four areas that were completely closed to
British fishing.
• Thus lasted for 6 months, after which Britain had no
right to fish in Iceland’s fishing zone.
Causes of conflict
• The Icelandic position was similar in all three
conflicts
• The major point was that Iceland depends on its
fishing industry more than any other state in the
world
• Iceland has few natural resources, no timber, no
fuel, little agricultural potential, and no mineral
deposits
• economy is uniquely dependent on fishing for
survival and for exports (79%), to fund the imports
needed for the other parts of the economy
• Iceland argued, therefore, that it had an
overwhelming need to ensure the survival of the
fish stocks in its area.
Causes of conflict
• Furthermore, during the 1970s fish stocks around
Iceland decreased by a third.
• This was because many neighbouring countries
especially Britain were over-fishing around
Iceland and Iceland needed to protect the cod.
• At the first meeting of substance on the Law of the
Sea, from July to August of 1974, more than 100
States supported the right of coastal States to
establish an Exclusive Economic Zone of up to
200 nautical miles from baselines. This included
Great Britain. Iceland stated that it was merely
enforcing what would soon be an international law
and that it was following precedents set by other
nations.
Causes of conflict
• Had Iceland’s suggestions for the reduction of
over-fishing been taken into account, this conflict
could have been avoided.
• Another cause was Great Britain’s reluctance in
recognizing Iceland's authority in extending its
fishing zone and so continued fishing inside the
disputed area (perhaps because of its maritime
authority)
• Also, the British fishing industry was making
substantial revenue (23.1 million pounds (approx.
equal to $51 million) worth of catch), making
Britain more reluctant to comply to Iceland’s new
regulation.
Effects: Short Term
• With the agreement in 1976, British fisheries were
greatly affected even though there was still some
leeway given to them.
• The economies of many North England fisheries
were affected and the industry declined rapidly.
• 1,500 British fishermen became unemployed and
another 7, 500 people on shore were briefly
unemployed
• Importing cod from Iceland caused cod prices to
rise slightly in Great Britain, by about 6 or 7 pence
a pound.
Effects: Long Term
• If the conflict had not happened, the overfishing by the British and other
neighbouring countries would have sped
up the extinction of cod from Icelandic
waters.
• In other words, the conflict actually helped
to alleviate the regional extinction of cod.
Bibliography
• www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/
geos/ic.html
• www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/
geos/uk.html
• http://www.american.edu/TED/icefish.htm
• http://www.britainssmallwars.com/RRGP/CodWar.htm