A Legal Regime for the Mining of Helium-3 on the Moon: U.S. Policy Options

Absent an agreed international legal framework, attempts by the United States or any other nation or private entity to acquire and bring to Earth significant quantities of He-3 could give rise to controversy and conflict. Consequently, it seems timely to revisit the issue of the legal regime potentially applicable to exploiting He-3 and other lunar resources. Part I of this Article will briefly discuss the technical and economic prospects for the develop of He-3-based fusion energy. Part II lays out the present legal situation concerning the exploitation of lunar resources such as He-3. Part III analyzes whether it is prudent for the United States to seek an international lunar resource regime. Concluding that it would be, Part IV provides possible policy options for the United States concerning the establishment of an international legal regime capable of facilitating the development of He-3-based fusion energy

Controlling Great Lakes Pollution: A Study in United States-Canadian Environmental Cooperation

In this context, a study of the proposed Agreement and, more particularly, of the long history of developing United States-Canadian cooperation that preceded it may be of use. First, this United States-Canadian experience offers guidance for the solution of some of the specific problems that programs for international environmental cooperation may face: questions of framework and approach; institutional organization, function, and authority; determination of objectives; apportionment of burdens; coordination; and implementation. Second, at a time when international discussion has focused principally on global approaches to the solution of environmental problems, it calls attention to the important, if less dramatic, contribution that can be made by more limited bilateral and regional cooperative arrangements; indeed, it is arguable that such bilateral and regional arrangements will ultimately prove to be the most significant forms of international environmental cooperation. Finally, this experience may serve to suggest that the concept of international environmental cooperation has limitations as well as potentialities, and thus may provide a more realistic basis for the Stockholm Conference\u27s work

The Canadian Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act: New Stresses on the Law of the Sea

The Canadian Pollution Prevention Act is of interest in several respects. It opens a new round in the historic and multifaceted struggle over freedom of the seas. It raises complex questions of international law and policy regarding the legal regime of Arctic waters, the concept of contiguous zones, the status of waters within archipelagoes, and the doctrines of innocent passage and international straits. It illustrates both the perception of an increasing number of coastal states that existing international law and international arrangements are inadequate to protect their legitimate interests, and the strong pressures within such states for unilateral action to remedy these perceived deficiencies. It suggests, in particular, the type of stress that the growing concern on the part of coastal states regarding ocean pollution is likely to exert on traditional law-of-the-sea doctrines, and it also suggests the complex issues which may be involved in attempting to achieve international agreement on a regulatory regime adequate to prevent such pollution. Finally, the Act offers an instructive study of the international legal process in action

Jonathan I. Charney: A Tribute

I first met Jonathan in 1967 when he was a student in my international law class at the University of Wisconsin Law School. It was only my second year of teaching--I had just come to Wisconsin after some years with the State Department\u27s Office of Legal Adviser. But Jonathan was a generous and forgiving, as well as excellent, student and somehow we both got through the course. Anyway, Jonathan became, first, the student of whom I was most fond; then, as his career developed, the student of whom I was most proud; and, eventually, as the years passed and our paths and work increasingly intersected, a valued colleague and friend. I can\u27t count the number of occasions we were together--collaborating on at least four collective book projects; participating in American Society of International Law, Law of the Sea Institute, or on other committees or conference panels; and, most notably, serving together on the American Journal of International Law \u27s Board of Editors where, for the last few years, Jonathan was the Co-Editor-in-Chief responsible for the Book Review Section of the Journal, which I edit