05.04.2013 Views

Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO

Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO

Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

74 Chapter 5<br />

hegemons give to egoistic self-interest, this chapter shows th<strong>at</strong> ocean dumping<br />

was perceived as an intern<strong>at</strong>ional and even a global environmental problem<br />

by Congress and by the Nixon administr<strong>at</strong>ion in the early 1970s.<br />

Through a series of hearings intended to <strong>at</strong>tract public <strong>at</strong>tention and to<br />

encourage legisl<strong>at</strong>ive action, a group of legisl<strong>at</strong>ors who claimed th<strong>at</strong> they<br />

were “trying to clean up the oceans” 2 established domestic regul<strong>at</strong>ion. To<br />

influence and move public opinion and political leaders, n<strong>at</strong>ionally and<br />

intern<strong>at</strong>ionally, congressional hearings spread the simple, powerful idea<br />

th<strong>at</strong> “the oceans are dying.” To supplement domestic regul<strong>at</strong>ion, it was<br />

argued, the United St<strong>at</strong>es should also work toward agreement on a global<br />

ocean dumping regime.<br />

Supporting the claim made by realists and power theorists, introduction<br />

of ocean dumping regul<strong>at</strong>ion domestically cre<strong>at</strong>ed significant pressure in<br />

the United St<strong>at</strong>es for some sort of global regul<strong>at</strong>ion able to harmonize the<br />

economic costs of environmental protection across countries. But the realist<br />

proposition th<strong>at</strong> the United St<strong>at</strong>es would be motiv<strong>at</strong>ed solely by egoistic<br />

self-interest and a need to vigorously protect the n<strong>at</strong>ional interest does<br />

not conform well to this case. Political leaders wanted the United St<strong>at</strong>es to<br />

persuade other countries to follow by setting a good example and demonstr<strong>at</strong>ing<br />

willingness to act against ocean dumping.<br />

Congressional Hearings on Ocean Dumping<br />

The U.S. Department of the Army’s disposal of some 65 tons of nerve gas<br />

in the Atlantic Ocean off Florida in the summer of 1969 focused n<strong>at</strong>ional<br />

and intern<strong>at</strong>ional <strong>at</strong>tention on the problem of unregul<strong>at</strong>ed ocean dumping<br />

of supposedly extremely dangerous m<strong>at</strong>erials. 3 In the words of one congressman<br />

(Congressional Record: House, September 8, 1971, p. 30854):<br />

“The nerve gas dumping incident reverber<strong>at</strong>ed around the world and<br />

focused public opinion on the need for legisl<strong>at</strong>ion.” 4 In August of 1970,<br />

despite n<strong>at</strong>ional and intern<strong>at</strong>ional protests, the Army disposed of surplus<br />

nerve gas rockets embedded in concrete vaults on the ocean floor deep<br />

under intern<strong>at</strong>ional w<strong>at</strong>ers. 5 “A major incident,” wrote Robert Smith<br />

(1970) in the New York Times. Concerned about this dumping practice,<br />

the UN <strong>Sea</strong>bed Committee made an after-the-fact “appeal to all governments<br />

to refrain from using the seabed and ocean floor as a dumping<br />

ground for toxic, radioactive and other noxious m<strong>at</strong>erial which might cause

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!