Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. The Exclusive Economic Zone: an Instrument of National Security? A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Defence and Strategic Studies at Massey University, Manawatu, New Zealand Christopher David Swan 2012 Abstract New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone is one or the world’s largest, and is disproportionately large compared to New Zealand’s terrestrial claim. This maritime claim promises the benefit of perpetual resource exploitation, and potentially forms a useful buffer in the defence of New Zealand’s terrestrial claims. As such, it would seem reasonable to consider the exclusive economic zone to be an instrument of national security. However, is this claim assured and are the expected benefits being realised? This thesis examines New Zealand’s maritime claims in the context of national security. To achieve this, it analyses the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and then comparatively assesses New Zealand’s claims in the context of the New Zealand national security framework. It also examines the legitimacy and assurance of those claims. Finally, the thesis examines the contribution to national security provided by the exclusive economic zone. In doing so, it identifies an unexpected threat to New Zealand’s national security, related to the manner in which New Zealand manages matters of strategic importance. ii Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank Dr John Tonkin-Covell and Dr John Moremon from the Centre for Defence and Strategic Studies at Massey University. Their guidance and encouragement have been instrumental in the production of this thesis. iii Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ iii Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 1: The Realm of New Zealand and its Mariime Zones ........................ 6 Chapter 2: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ........................ 12 Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone ................................................................... 13 Exclusive Economic Zone .................................................................................... 18 Continental Shelf ................................................................................................. 25 High Seas ............................................................................................................ 31 Search and Rescue ............................................................................................. 34 The Area .............................................................................................................. 38 Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment ..................................... 40 Research, Development and Technology Transfer ............................................. 45 Dispute Resolution Process ................................................................................. 47 Other Provisions .................................................................................................. 53 Chapter 3: Universal Ratification of the Law of the Sea ................................. 56 Chapter 4: New Zealand's National Security Framework ............................... 70 Chapter 5: Implications of Climate Change .................................................... 79 Chapter 6: Perspective of a Lead Agency ...................................................... 85 Defence Assessment 2010 .................................................................................. 86 Defence White Paper 2010 ................................................................................ 102 Chapter 7: Security Dividend of the Maritime Claims ................................... 106 Chapter 8: Economic Value of the Maritime Claims ..................................... 116 Living Resources ............................................................................................... 116 Non-Living Resources ....................................................................................... 120 Other Economic Factors .................................................................................... 124 Chapter 9: Threats to New Zealand’s Maritime Environment ....................... 126 Illegal Resource Exploitation ............................................................................. 126 Disregard for National or International Law ....................................................... 128 Illegal Transportation of Goods or People ......................................................... 129 Creation of Environmental Hazards ................................................................... 130 National Approach ............................................................................................. 132 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 137 Bibliography .................................................................................................... 143 iv Introduction On 1 April 1978, New Zealand declared sovereignty over the world’s fourth largest exclusive economic zone (EEZ).1 The right to declare sovereignty over this zone is established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The sovereign rights afforded New Zealand include the exclusive right to exploit both the living and non-living resources contained therein. The better known resources contained within the exclusive economic zone include the wild fish stocks, the natural gas and oil reserves and the mineral deposits.2 However, New Zealand’s benefit extends beyond the exploitation of resources. In addition to the exclusive right to exploit the EEZ’s natural resources, the UNCLOS allows, and in some cases obligates, New Zealand to regulate most matters related to the management and exploitation of the EEZ. New Zealand’s exercise of these rights has included a comprehensive wild-catch quota management system (QMS), based on the concept of individual transferable quota (ITQ). New Zealand also has primacy on research and development, and carries responsibility for preservation of the marine environment. Thus, New Zealand assumes a wide range of benefits and obligations by virtue of its claim to an EEZ. However, this claim comes with additional obligations. The instrument by which New Zealand claims its EEZ – the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea – cannot be ratified in part. For New Zealand to claim an EEZ, it must commit to the UNCLOS in its entirety. The UNCLOS has been described as one of the world’s most comprehensive agreements, and it includes almost all aspects of the maritime environment: not just the EEZ.3 As such, the benefit derived from claiming an EEZ must be tempered against the 1 Ministry for Primary Industries, “Fisheries: Environmental,” http://www.mpi.govt.nz/fisheries/environmental (accessed 27 January, 2013); New Zealand Government, “Territorial Sea, Contiguous Zone, and Exclusive Economic Zone Act 1977,” 28 (1977); New Zealand Government, “Territorial Sea and Exclusive Economic Zone Act Commencement Order 1978,” 62 (1978). 2 United Nations, “United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” (United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, New York, 1982), 40-49. 3 Hinrichsen, Don, Coastal Waters of the World: Trends, Threats, and Strategies (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1998), 41. 1 consequential, and possibly unintended, consequences of accepting the wider convention. The wider convention – although brokered by the United Nations – is essentially an international treaty. This means there is no intrinsic enforcement right other than that afforded by the convention itself. Thus, the assurance provided by the UNCLOS is determined by the degree to which it is ratified and honoured by the States of the world. Whilst many States have ratified the UNCLOS, the United States has not.4 As such, the utility of the international treaty as the sole means by which New Zealand assures its claim to an EEZ should be questioned. The combination of these three factors: New Zealand’s disproportionately large exploitation rights, the comprehensiveness of the UNCLOS, and the questionable enforcement regime introduce the objective of this thesis. New Zealand’s claim to an exclusive economic zone is disproportionately large with respect to other States of the world. As such, it is arguable that the potential exploitation dividend is such that it should economically advantage New Zealand with respect to other States. New Zealand’s national security system lists “sustaining economic prosperity” as one of seven key objectives that underpin New Zealand’s national security.5 Hence, it is arguable that New Zealand’s EEZ should be considered as an instrument of national security: a key asset that contributes to the well being of all New Zealanders in perpetuity. However, the claim to an EEZ cannot be considered in isolation. If the wider implications of the UNCLOS were to seriously compromise other key national security objectives, then