21. In order to achieve the vision and goals, the below mentioned principles should guide the policy for Securing the Oceans. Ocean policy should: -

　

22. Some important policy requirements are mentioned below: -

　

23. In a regional set up: -

　

24. The keyword to overall Ocean Security is Co-ordination and Cooperation. But this is more easily said than done. Before we can think of international co-operation, it is essential to examine the framework at the various levels. Ocean Governance involves a number of departments dealing with different aspects and uses of the ocean, yet each fighting for its own turf, within an administration. UNCLOS III (1982) which came into force in 1994 was an umbrella framework of laws and regulations which co-ordinated the various aspects of the Ocean, right from military activities to coastal management, ocean development, uses, resources, maritime safety and security, environment and ecosystems. It was a comprehensive, document combining and integrating the array of initiatives taken separately at different times. This would serve as guidance for all nations in protecting and preserving the ocean. Agenda 21, at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, adopted a programme of action for sustainable development for the 21^st century. Together they form a new approach to ocean governance.

　

25. Although UNCLOS III took 9 years of discussions and meetings to be formulated and promulgated and 12 more years to be ratified by the requisite number of states, the final outcome may now in hindsight be seen to have some lacunae. An important drawback was the sovereignty of coastal states on certain maritime zones. The rights over those ocean spaces also involved responsibilities over the spaces. Firstly, many states especially newly independent ones guarded their sovereignty jealously without allowing other states to chase or intercept law breakers across maritime boundaries. For example smugglers, drug runners, human traffickers and even pirates moved from one zone to another taking shelter of a neighbouring state to avoid arrest. Secondly, there are a number of states who cannot carry out their responsibility regarding preservation of the environment, maritime security and safety, and prevention/control of pollution due to inadequate facilities or lack of finances, thus allowing the seas to be polluted or resources to be ill managed. Such effects are then felt in the neighbouring zones affecting neighbouring states. Thirdly the freedom of the high seas allowed unsustained fishing beyond the EEZ, thus permitting exploitation of resources which were being conserved by coastal states. This required separate treaties and agreements. The framework of UNCLOS III although being generally acceptable needs some refining. One case may be that the requirement of co-operation should be made more forceful as it is the key to the framework. I will take the case of India, which is not too different from most countries. In India there is an organisation at the local level i.e. the state or county level and the Central or Federal level. The various departments or ministries ¹⁰dealing with different aspects of the ocean and connected areas are: -

　

26. Each of the ministries and departments jealously protects its own turf and hence it is often difficult to obtain consensus on certain issues. For example, there is no Maritime Apex Board since the ministries cannot agree on which ministry should act as the nodal ministry and secretariat for such a Board. The Central Government makes and passes the laws and regulations but they are to be carried out at the local levels. Therefore this local level is a very important level. Only if there is sufficient understanding, education, awareness and Will, can a programme succeed. For example, the local fishermen must be aware and convinced that the fish stocks are dwindling and that limiting the catch will help conserve/sustain stocks; or letting untreated sewage into the sea will give rise to harmful algal blooms and perhaps red tides. Therefore environmental awareness and self-discipline are most essential for dealing with the ills of the ocean, to protect and preserve the environment, to prevent and control marine pollution.

　

27. For any action on Ocean Security to be successful it is a MUST for Government participation, Corporate bodies and NGO's also have a role and can assist and support but the main ingredient at the state level is strong Government action. Governments draw up legal and institutional frameworks at the local and national levels for internal requirements; and at international levels for regional or global interaction. The Government must have a Central Co-ordinating Authority to oversee and co-ordinate all departments dealing with ocean activities. The local/county government being an important level of functioning should be given wide freedom of action within the broad policy. The national government must have an Apex Authority to participate in international meetings with powers to take decisions on matters of co-operation.

　

28. An ideal institutional framework should have an organisation to deal with intra and international ocean issues. The intranational framework should have: -

　

29. For the purpose of dealing with international ocean issues with foreign countries the international framework should have: -

　

30. Bureaucrats and officials who are very knowledgeable and professional generally run governments. They make the policies. However politicians control them. Awareness of environmental matters by the public at large or by politicians is low. Environment to politicians is just another issue where they may be able to score points or gain power or popularity to be re-elected. When it comes to international co-operation the first concerns of all states are selfish self-interests. Environmental politics is all about North-South issues and haves versus have-nots. Global environmental issues are invariably linked with economic issues. That is why co-operation cannot be easily achieved at large fora such as World bodies. But co-operation is a MUST if we are to survive.

　

31. A new agenda of global environmental problems will demand international attention in this century. By the end of the 1990's, environmentalists increasingly saw the London Dumping Convention as peripheral to the most serious problem of marine pollution - land based sources of pollution. Pressures were growing leading to the Bio Earth Summit and Agenda 21 which was a Programme of Action detailing a blueprint of the measures required to effect the transition to sustainability. Right from 1972 - the Stockholm UN Conference on Human Environment, that led to the Population Conferences in Bucharest in 1974 and Cairo in 1994, the Habitat Conferences in Vancouver in 1976 and Istanbul in 1996, the Women's Conferences in Mexico City in 1975, Copenhagen in 1980, Nairobi in 1985 and Beijing in 1995, the Social summit in 1995, the Rio Earth summit in 1992 and the WSSD in Johannesburg in 2002 , the Conferences provided a broad framework in which economic, social, population, gender and human settlement issues could be seen in their systemic relationship to each other and were the common thread that linked the agendas and the results of each of those Conferences to the environment. At each of those Conferences there were differences between the industrialised and developing countries, led by Brazil boycotting the 1972 Stockholm Conference. The developing countries were deeply suspicious of the motives of the industrialised countries and concerned that their preoccupation with environment 'fads' would deflect attention and resources from their first priority of dealing with the critical problems of poverty and underdevelopment. They also worried that the industrialised countries might seek to impose new constraints on developing countries in the name of environment. For example the Agenda had an item on the preservation of whales which was then hardly a concern for most of the developing world. In fact the Stockholm Conference was saved from boycott by inviting Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, a champion of the developing world, to address the conference and to underscore their interests and concerns. As Mrs. Gandhi most succinctly put it in her memorable style that "Poverty is the greatest Polluter".¹¹ Indeed issues of finance and the basis for sharing responsibilities and costs continue to be the principal bone of contention between the developed and developing countries. They have become central to international negotiations on virtually every environment and sustainable development issue, most notably in the climate change and biodiversity conventions.¹² The importance of Stockholm was that it established the framework for these negotiations and the co-operative arrangements they produced. Admittedly it brought the developing countries into a full and influential participation in these processes. Stockholm led to a proliferation of new environmental initiatives and the creation of the United Nations Environment Programme headquartered in Nairobi, as well as national environment ministries or departments in most countries.

　

32. Signing of documents or conventions does not ensure their implementation. Therefore to create and strengthen the needed global environmental regimes over the next decade governments and analysts have suggested three broad alternative strategies as follows:-

　

33. This approach is based on continued incremental changes without any radical changes in policy or framework or institutional structure at the global level. It assumes that reasonable progress can be made by dealing with issues on a case by case basis within the parameters of existing global political institutions, diplomatic practice and socio-economic realities. This approach would search for consensus on objectives with the intention to share research and monitor problems without binding commitments to regulatory action by signatories. For example in the case of a climate change convention, the signatories would pledge to abide by the broad principles leaving ample room for national discretion in adopting national plans regarding greenhouse gases and co-ordinating research on global change. Agreements involving globally binding legal obligations such as the Montreal Protocol could then be negotiated. Agreements negotiated on an incremental strategy would leave room for more aggressive measures in future. National Plans whose targets and time schedules are determined by national conditions could be substituted for absolute targets and schedules. These national plans could be revised regularly on the basis of current information and feedback. Such continuing consultations would definitely accelerate the pace of adjustment in lagging countries.

　

34. However, incremental approach would do little to bind developing countries to global agreements for action, thus decreasing the effectiveness of most environmental regimes. The issues of industrialised states' reluctance to divert major resources to developing countries for participation in global environmental programmes would remain unresolved. Hence, environmental issues would remain isolated from larger North-South economic development issues. Thus an incremental change approach would settle for modest progress toward effective regimes, on the assumption that further increments of progress will follow later. If the final outcome of climate change negotiation reflects past policy of some developed countries, it might call for reductions in the projected level of global emissions but not the stabilisation of greenhouse gas emissions by industrialised countries. In the absence of major commitment of resources for technology transfer, the agreement would provide for very little obligatory curbing of carbon emissions by developing countries. This approach therefore is unlikely to build the momentum necessary to reverse these serious trends before environmental degradation gets worse.

　

35. The Global Partnership approach refers to new North - South arrangements linking global environmental issues and economic relations. Such a global partnership strategy would make co-operation on North - South economic issues a central feature of environmental diplomacy. It starts from the assumption that environment and natural resources can only be conserved under conditions of sustainable global development and that the present world economic system makes sustainable development impossible. It also recognises the political reality that developing countries will definitely demand some linkage between global environmental agreements desired by most industrialized states and demands regarding North - South economic relations. This global bargain strategy thus represents a holistic, as opposed to an incremental approach to the formation of environment regimes. This global partnership strategy would require that developed countries display a new willingness to deal with the primary economic issues of the developing countries and to help the environment and resource management in all countries. The developing countries especially the larger ones such as China, India, Brazil, Mexico and Indonesia would have to make their economic development plans more environmentally responsive to the concerns of the developed countries.

　

36. In the Global Partnership approach pressure tactics could be used for bargaining. For example Global Climate Change could be linked to Population policy. The world population is likely to increase from 6 billion people in 2000 and stabilize at 10 billion after 2050, only if more effective measures are taken worldwide. Since 90% of population growth is in the developing countries, the industrialized countries may demand commitments on population stabilization, whereas the developing countries could respond by demanding a pledge to reduce the per capita consumption of energy by the North. This bargaining principle, is used mainly to obtain development assistance in the form of debt reduction, increased market access and major commitment of funds, in return for complying with environmental agreements.

　

37. A global partnership approach would once again require a level of Political Will to address global environmental problems. This "Will" appears to be lacking. Moreover there is a strong resistance in the USA, Germany and Japan to the kind of resource transfers envisioned in this approach.¹³ Success of a North - South partnership approach depends upon recognition of mutual dependence and self interest among countries of North and South. The industrialized countries must acknowledge the fact that they cannot solve global environment problems without the cooperation of the developing countries. The latter in turn must recognize that they cannot pursue a sustainable development strategy without the assistance of the industrialised North. Critics claim that the costs of this approach will be too high, while proponents counter that the costs of not taking it will be fatal.

　

38. The Global Governance Approach is based on the premise that the existing institutions and international law are inadequate to deal with the environmental challenges facing the Earth, and that only far reaching institutional restructing at the global level can deal with the ever increasing environmental disruption and natural resource depletion. This would require a global environmental legislative body with the power to impose environment regulations on nation states and to impose sanctions on offenders. While such a proposal was mooted in 1989 and supported by 30 countries it was opposed by Britain, USA, China, Japan and the erstwhile USSR. A potential problem is sensitivity of most developing countries to intrusions on their sovereignty by the developed world. One of the arguments against such an institution is that the costs would be extremely high to establish a worldwide system of enforcement with large scale monitoring and policing capabilities, and also with the power to enforce economic sanctions. Another argument against a global environmental authority is that most compliance with international regimes has little to do with fear of sanctions, implying that no supranational institution is required. The global governance approach, which seemed hopelessly idealistic only a few years ago, has suddenly been given legitimacy by the support it has received from most industrialized states. The creation of a global environmental authority may be seen as appropriate at a later stage of evolution in global environmental politics.

　

39. Having seen the various approaches it may be seen that the Global Governance Approach is not cost effective considering that sanctions may not deter non cooperating countries in complying with global environment regimes. The Global Partnership Approach has been gaining ground despite North - South disagreement on economic issues, but insufficient funding does not make for cooperation although agreements or conventions may be signed. Therefore the slowest and least efficient approach, the Incremental Change approach appears better suited for true cooperation. This approach on a case to case basis also means that as awareness and political Will increase, compliance will increase, and gradually tend towards the Global Partnership Approach. This also means that taking case to case, there will be some environmental issues which are not global but rather regional - and sometimes involving developing countries only - such as conservation, straddling fish stocks, land based marine pollution, which will be dealt on the lines of the Global Partnership Approach. This has succeeded in the Regional Seas programme in 18 sea areas fairly well and has also managed within the funds available. Other issues such as Global Warming, Climate change, invasive species having a global reach may be dealt with purely on the incremental change approach. Thus a Regional Partnership is more likely to succeed than a Global Partnership approach. It may be mentioned that though there may be reluctance by developed countries to commit economic assistance to the developing countries, the former are spending millions of dollars in dealing with environmental problems already created. One such example is the programme to deal with the invasive species brought in by ballast water to North American Coasts. Between 1989 and 2000 the US government may have required between $750 million and $1 billion in expenditure on measures to control invasive European Zebra mussels.¹⁴

　

40. The above framework at the governmental levels also needs support and participation by NGO's and Corporate Business Houses. A potent force that could wipe out the obstacles to strong new global environmental regimes is the support of voters and grassroots activism. The global network of environmental NGO's will undoubtedly become larger and better organised with transnational coalitions. With increased financial resources from Foundations and modern communications they can muster worldwide activists to boost public opinion and political clout.

　

41. Corporate Business houses have learnt that environmental protection and sustainable economic growth are compatible goals. Enlightened businesses are increasingly recognizing that they will benefit from sustainable development and are seeking ways to integrate their profit-oriented bottom line with broader social and environmental considerations. A number of major industry wide institutions such as the International Chamber of Commerce and World Business Council on Sustainable Development, which count many major corporations among their members, have embraced the issue.¹⁵ Another strong supporter that must be drawn into the framework for Ocean Security support is the Judiciary. In every country, the Judiciary is an independent organization with learned and enlightened judges manning them. In India the Supreme Court has ruled independently and unilaterally on environmental issues and has hauled up the Government before it. In one case it ordered the conversion of all public buses, taxis and auto-rickshaws to CNG in view of the deteriorating air pollution situation in Delhi; and in another case it ordered closure of all polluting industries discharging into the Yamuna river after giving them a justifiable grace period. This has resulted in a drastic change in the air pollution and Yamuna river pollution situations.

　

42. The new concept of Securing the Oceans means a holistic approach to Comprehensive Ocean Security. All securities are inter related whether they be military/national, transportation, food, environment or ecological. Terrorism and Piracy are the very visible and dangerous faces of threats to Ocean security, but the invisible and hidden threats to our resources, environment and ecological balance are even greater as they are killing the Oceans softly but surely. All is not lost, if we spurt into action immediately. Population explosion, globalisation and development are the main threats to ocean resources and the environment. The answer is to carry out a sustainable development strategy. Firstly there has to be the Political Will which is built up through awareness and education. Next our structures and framework must be organised at the local, national and international levels so as to integrate marine environment preservation /protection and peaceful uses of the Ocean. The UNCLOS III structure covered most aspects but did not foresee problems on jurisdictional boundaries and aspects of sovereignty. The Ocean governance concept has to work through a cooperative framework right from tension diffusion to policing, monitoring and preventive and protective measures. Ocean Governance is based on the idea that all aspects of Ocean management including military activities, maintaining the peace, use, resource extraction and environmental management must be addressed and integrated.

43. While cooperation is all-important, there is a constant tussle between North and South on account of the finances required for sustainable development and protection/preservation of the environment. It is imperative that the developed countries help the developing countries meet the requirements of sustainable development through assistance in the form of debt reduction, increased market access and commitment of funds. Besides government agencies, the community, corporate business houses, NGO's and the Judiciary should also share in this responsibility of Securing the Oceans. Just as all people within a country have equal rights and the benefits of development projects apply equally to rich and poor, with an obligation by the government to give more help and support to bring up the downtrodden and the lesser privileged, so also in the Global Village of Earth, the World Administrations should make sure that enough funding is available to all countries, mainly the lesser developed so as to be equal partners in all programmes and schemes.