Thank you to those who provided quick and clear insights into the UNCLOS question concerning the regulatory distinction between territorial seas and EEZs. The collected responses below would make for a nice lecture on the topic!
Paul -- Paul Harris: It's even simpler than that: territorial waters are no different than lakes (e.g., the Great Lakes); they are part of a state's territory, with all the sovereign rights that come with that. In contrast, the EEZ is an area where the associated state has more rights than other states, but not exclusive rights (unless of course the state happens to be China; it insists that the US cannot fly "spy" planes in its EEZ, which is silly, and it claims the whole South China Sea as its own TERRITORY; again, silly, but it's hard to ignore given China's growing strength). -- Hans Bruyninckx: The main difference is that the EEZ is part of the international waters and thus does not fall under national law. The 12 mile zone is part of the national territory and this falls under the jurisdiction of the state. A good example to illustrate the difference is that a state has to claim an EEZ (it is not automatic! Peru was the first state to do so), since this falls under international law, this also creates obligations under international law: one of those is that the state is obliged to protect the marine environment in the EEZ. This is not the case in the territorial waters where the state has the sovereign right to protect or not -- Wil Burns: Here’s some of the distinctions: 1. Within the territorial zone, vessels are subject to the rules of innocent passage, which includes all of the restrictions under Article 19, so while a vessel traversing in an EEZ can, for example, take on aircraft or other weapons, or can conduct military exercises, it can’t do so in the territorial seas; 2. Submarines in the territorial sea need to surface and fly the flag, not so in the EEZs; 3. Coastal states can carve out sea lands in the territorial seas; 4. Territorial seas and all the rights of sovereignty that flow from this inure to a coastal State simply on the basis of geography; by distinction, States need to declare an EEZ to benefit from UNCLOs specific legal protections. Some States haven’t, e.g. the UK, which relies on Continental Shelf Rights under the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf 1958; 5. Part V of UNCLOS places restrictions on coastal States vis-à-vis the EEZs which don’t apply to territorial seas, e.g. erection of installations and structures that may interfere with transit through recognized international sea lanes. -- Jeremy Firestone: TS is sovereign territory—EEZ just have sov rights. There is a difference between what other states can do as far as navigation—can’t enter airspace or navigate submerged in a submarine, e.g., in TS. Above water, nav has to be “innocent passage” in TS; freedom of the seas applies in EEZ. There are also differences regarding sharing of surplus natural resources (e.g., fish) between EEZ and TS. There are greater ability to enforce sanitary, customs, etc in TS than EEZ. Coastal State is also a term of art which refers to a state where a ship, e.g, navigates into its EEZ or TS but doesn’t land in its ports (that would be a port state). -- Peter J. Jacques: The difference is that the coastal state has fiduciary responsibility for the EEZ. Peter Sand’s piece details this well: (2004) Sovereignty Bounded: Public Trusteeship for Common Pool Resources?. Global Environmental Politics (4) , 47–71. For a summary some of this is discussed in my piece for the ISA-Blackwell compendium: "International Regulation of Ocean Pollution and Ocean Fisheries" -- Dimitris Stevis Territorial waters extends 12 miles outwards of the coast (which is often not as clearly defined as one may think). Within TW countries have complete jurisdiction with the exception of innocent passage (i.e., other countries' vessels, including military ones, can navigate though it without stopping or engaging in any activities violating the coastal country's laws). If the distance is less than 24 miles between coasts then you have ways to delimit provided that the countries at add are willing to use them. EEZ extends outwards of the coast (or 188 miles out of TW) and in that zone the coastal country has economic jurisdiction. Other countries' vessels can stop, engage in certain activities etc.. However, there are still important issues here involving anadromous and straddling fisheries, environmental uses etc. Moreover, some countries like Brazil oppose military uses by others, like placing listening devices, engaging in military practices or hanging out in ways that seem threatening. Similarly, if there is less than 400 miles between coasts there are ways to solve the problem, if countries are willing to use them. The ICJ has played an important role in creating law with respect to TWs and EEZ. Finally, while the EEZ covers water column and seabed, the Continental Shelf definition in current use allows countries to extend that quite far out if the proper geological formations are present (and they have the researchers and lawyers to make the case). Perhaps I should add that as far as the USA was and is concerned military navigation and uses has been central (much more so than anything else). For many Southern countries fisheries were key. For many US states drilling the seabed was key. Hence the compromise of the EEZ (as opposed to a 200 TW that would have hindered navigation). -- Charlotte Epstein: My understanding is that the territorial waters (12nm) are those over which the state exercises sovereignty per se, both in military terms (unauthorised entry into that zone is a direct violation of sovereignty), and in terms of ownership of resources; whereas the (200m) EEZ concerns economic rights only, but not legal sovereignty per se (ie only that state can exploit resources there, but a vessel entering that area for passage only is not violating sovereignty). -- Paul F. Steinberg Associate Professor of Political Science & Environmental Policy http://www.hmc.edu/steinberg Department of Humanities, Social Sciences, & the Arts 301 East Platt Boulevard Harvey Mudd College Claremont, CA 91711 tel. 909-607-3840
