Thematic Concerns and Scope

do possess raw materials for which there is high demand in the international market,⁸²the relatively well-off developing LLS are so small a minority as to be negligible.

Traditionally, LLS have had to fight for the right of free access to the sea in order to participate in international trade. To that end, many multilateral and bilat-eral agreements have been signed guaranteeing the right of transit of LLS through neighboring territories. This has meant a change in the traditional role of the law of the sea, a fait accompli confirmed by R. J. Dupuy, who noted that “the classi-cal law of the sea had only one basic dimension—the right of navigation on the surface—and it hardly knew the sub-marine milieu.”⁸⁵Indeed, today the “sub-marine milieu” has real bearing on LLS demands on maritime spaces.

Certainly, the oceans constituted, for classical jurists, the preferential support of jus communicationis.⁸⁶But rapid technological development provoked a diver-sification of utilization of maritime spaces: Seas constitute not only a “means of communication” but also a source of food and an ample treasure of unexploited resources.⁸⁷Humanity turns toward the sea for subsistence as our needs in food, fuel, and other resources intensify. As the utility of the sea has varied, its role also has evolved: from medium for communications to reservoir of wealth.⁸⁸Dupuy justly emphasized that the biological resources presented the first aspect of the reservoir of wealth, but the most complete expression of this reality has been noticed only recently, with the exploitation of the mineral resources of the seabed.⁸⁹Indeed, man now has a whole new relationship with the sea and its valu-able resources.⁹⁰

The growing exploitation of marine resources and the extension of demands of LLS upon marine spaces render coexistence between these two aspects more and more difficult. Free access to the sea, based on the freedom of sea passage,

85René-Jean Dupuy, Les contradictions du droit de la mer,Revue Française de l’énergie 187 (1973); see alsoRené-Jean Dupuy, The Law of the Sea: Current Problems 6 (Oceana Publications 1974).

86René-Jean Dupuy & A. Piquemal, Les appropriations nationales des espaces mar-itimes,Colloquium Montpellier, 113 (Pedone 1972); Mpazi Sinjela, supran. 44, at 31;

and Helmut Tuerk & Gerhard Hafner, The Landlocked Countries and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, inLaw of the Sea 58 (Hugo Caminos ed., Ashgate 2001).

87Seegenerally Eugen Seibold, Marine Science at the Dawn of the Year 2000 inResearch, International Law and the Sea in Man’s Future, IMPACT, vol. XXXIII, No. 3/4, 255, 276 (UNESCO 1983); see also T. V. R. Pillay, Return to the Sea—Not as Hunter but as Farmer inid.,at 445.

88SeeDupuy & Piquemal, supran. 86, at 13; see alsoHarold K. Jacobson, Network of Interdependence: International Organizations and Global Political System241 (2d ed., Knopf 1984).

89See id.

90SeeM. L. Sarin, The Asian-African States and the Development of International Law, in The Future of International Law in a Multicultural World130 (René-Jean Dupuy, ed., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1983).

for many years constituted the principal claim of LLS. Today, in addition to the question of transit (support to communication), another problem preoccupies them: participation in and access to the resources of the sea on the same terms as coastal States (economic entitlement). However, the economic entitlement issue must be left to another study.

Certainly, though the transit problem has long been solved for European LLS, considerable problems remain for developing LLS in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The urgency of solving the problem perhaps explains the selflessness of the developed LLS regarding the transit problems of developing LLS. Because historically the most important question for LLS has been freedom of access to the sea, their most important demand has always been recognition by the international community that law supporting the right of access is fundamental. This explains why their effort has been to obtain a universal treaty-regime on this matter.

Indeed, it is up to public international law, especially the law of the sea, to cor-rect inequalities by establishing a specific legal regime based on equity and jus-tice.⁹¹With that spirit in mind, and against the background of the numerous com-plex problems encountered by LLS in their quest to improve their status, a prime consideration in writing this book has been to review briefly the pattern of evolu-tion, the solidarity, and the strategy of LLS to meet their transit objectives. Its pur-pose is to assess the strengths and limits of international law regarding the access of LLS to the sea. In particular, it attempts to determine whether international law as it stands satisfies the legitimate economic requirements of LLS. In this process, in parallel with discussing principles of international law that dominated the evo-lution of the rights of access to and from the sea, the book also reviews both gen-eral and specific conventions, along with restrictions on access to and from the sea, some of which are often challenged by LLS. The book highlights legal provi-sions relevant for LLS and critically analyzes the merits and demerits of the treaty regime from the perspective of LLS. In appreciation of the continual evolution of international law, this book also comments briefly on current initiatives and devel-opments in international arenas and tries to simplify both the theoretical and the practical problems LLS face. How these developments lead to different legal instruments with normative value underscores both the evolutionary nature of international law and the perennial efforts associated with its evolution.

91The law of the sea has often shown regard to geographical circumstances, treating them as legal factors—“ratione materiae.” In the Case Concerning Delimitation of the Mar-itime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (the Gulf of Maine Case(Canada v. USA)), for instance, the Court noted: “Just as the criteria to which they must give effect are basically founded upon geography, the practical methods in question can likewise only be methods appropriate for use against a background of geography.” See theGulf of Maine Case(1984) (Canada v. USA), ICJ, Rep. 329 paragraph 199.