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

Power-Based Regime Analysis 81
said: “The Committee wishes to emphasize its awareness that the types of
problems with which [the ocean dumping bill] deals are global in nature.
We are not so blind as to assume that in dealing with the problems created
by our own ocean dumping activities, we are thereby assuring the protection
of the world’s oceans for all mankind. Other nations, already moving
to grapple with these troublesome issues, also will and must play vital roles
in this regard.” (House Report no. 361, p. 14) A sense of guilt for past polluting
activity was a further incentive for the United States to take the initiative
to begin controlling ocean dumping globally: “The committee
recognizes that the United States has been heavily involved in ocean dumping
activities and that the kinds of materials that our highly industrialized,
commercial nation may be forced to dispose of may be particularly hazardous
to the health of the oceans.” (ibid.) Furthermore, in terms more
commonly used by ideational scholars and reflectivists than by realists and
power theorists, the House committee’s report urged the United States to
play a leadership role: “Importantly, we believe strongly that someone must
take the first steps.” (ibid.) The need for U.S. leadership had also been
stressed at the earlier hearings. 36
In Congress, Cousteau’s statements (originally published in the Washington
Post and reprinted in the Congressional Record) that “the oceans are
in danger of dying” and “the pollution is general” were repeated frequently,
as were his and Heyerdahl’s descriptions of pollution encountered
in isolated and previously unspoiled parts of the oceans. 37 Cousteau’s earlier
support for the Nixon administration’s bill was also repeated. The
soundness of the two explorers’ statements and policy advice was not questioned.
Debatable knowledge was not debated. Moreover, the abundant
scientific uncertainties that surrounded ocean dumping necessitated immediate
action instead of restraint. Senator Hollings declared: “The seas are
dying according to Jacques Cousteau, but we have not done much to find
out whether he is right or not. And if we wait much longer, we may not
have the luxury of time to find out. Because if the oceans die, we die.” (Sen.
E. Hollings, Congressional Record: Senate, November 24, 1971, p. 43074)
Some proposed even more stringent regulation. 38
It was, as would be expected, congressmen from states contiguous to
the Great Lakes and from the coastal states who most actively supported
control of ocean dumping. Undoubtedly, politicians also felt pressure to