Protecting Australia\u27s Maritime Borders: The MV Tampa and Beyond

The protection of Australia\u27s maritime borders and sovereign interests at sea has, in recent times, increasingly become a leading national security issue. The arrangements for surveillance and enforcement in Australia\u27s maritime zones have seemingly been in almost constant review in what has become a highly politicised issue. Furthermore, the increased incidence of seaborne illegal migration attempts in late 2001, together with the events of 11 September of that year has focused public, as well as official, attention upon all aspects of what has come to be known as homeland security. Homeland security is a complex issue, and the problems associated with the protection of our maritime borders have important operational, legal, administrative, political and diplomatic implications. The new emphasis on maritime border protection and the debate over the best organisational arrangements with which to safeguard Australia\u27s sovereign interests at sea thus have become a most pressing national interest. The confluence of the events of 2001, a heightened public awareness of, and concern with, border protection issues and the ongoing evolution of our national policy and legal frameworks for the protection of the offshore estate, influenced the Centre for Maritime Policy to hold a conference on this most important issue of public policy. The conference, Protecting Australia\u27s Maritime Borders, was held in Canberra on 20 March 2001. This volume is a product of that conference, including all the papers that were presented on the day, an expanded conclusion and two extra chapters: the first, by Mitchell Evans, who was unable to make \u27\u3e the trip to Canberra from Norfolk Island at the last moment, on the perspective of the Offshore Territories; and the second, by Bruce McLennan, based on research undertaken as part of his studies in the Centre\u27s Masters degree programme in Maritime Studies. The aim of the book (and preceding conference) is to address the issue of maritime border protection in a holistic fashion, from the perspective of how maritime border protection works as a system, thus avoiding a sectoral, specific interest-based approach. The prevalence of border protection issues in the mass media, often covered in a sensationalised and politicised manner, has probably hindered rather than assisted the national debate. Maritime border protection is too important an issue for the future of Australia\u27s security to be left to such unruly examination. The Centre for Maritime Policy thus was prompted to promote the production of this more considered set of analyses in the wake of the hype resulting from the voyage of the MV Tampa. We should be clear, however, that the book is not about seaborne asylum seekers, specifically, or immigration, more generally. Nor does the Centre itself advocate any particular organisational design for the surveillance of, and enforcement within, Australia\u27s maritime jurisdiction. Rather, the book is intended to provide a more reasoned forum for the discussion of those maritime border protection arrangements. The result, we hope, has been to collect a range of expert opinions, which will help to advance the debate on maritime border protection in Australia. It is important that we acknowledge the assistance of those who have made this book possible, particularly given that the entire project was undertaken at quite short notice. Firstly, we are grateful to ail paper presenters, session chairs and authors, who have been most supportive by supplying written papers in good time. We appreciate, in particular, the contributions of Derek Woolner, who was willing to replace another conference speaker at short notice and whose thoughtful and knowledgeable chapter has added much value to the contents of this volume; and Ray Funneii, who agreed at extremely short notice to make time in his busy schedule to open the conference, and provide the Foreword to the book. We must also thank the Royal Australian Navy for their support and participation in what was, politically, a difficult time for the Australian Defence Force, in general, and the Navy, in particular. The positive response to Navy participation is proof, however, of the benefits of the continued engagement of the three services (and Defence generaiiy) with such professional forums as the one held in Canberra in March 2002. Specificaiiy, we thank Commodore Warwick Gately, Captain Peter Jones, Captain Peter Leschen, Lieutenant Commander Cameron Moore, Dr David Stevens in his role at the time as Acting Director of the Navy\u27s Sea Power Centre and, since taking over that Director\u27s job, Captain Richard Menhinick. As usual, little gets done at the Centre for Maritime Policy without the assistance of Myree Mitcheii, who was involved in organising and running the conference, and putting the book together in its final stages. The Centre\u27s Visiting Naval Feiiow, Commander Barry Snushall, helped with liaison with the Sea Power Centre and at the conference, and Vina Ram-Bidesi also assisted on the day of the conference

Evaluation of the Pacific oceanscape to manage the Pacific Islands and ocean environment

The forty-first meeting of Pacific Island Forum (PIF) in Port Vila, Vanuatu in August 2010 endorsed the new concept of \u27Pacific Oceanscape\u27 to support development, management and conservation of the Pacific Islands region. The leaders also encouraged all Pacific Islands regional organisations to implement the concept in partnership with other relevant organisations. The Pacific Oceanscape concept is a renewed effort to implement the Pacific [slands Regional Oceans Policy (PIROP). [t reflects all PIROP principles and aligns them with urgencies associated with climate change impacts on small island developing states. It also promotes regional cooperation in the establishment and management of large-scale marine protected areas (MPAs). MPAs are expected to minimise imminent threats to the marine environment and optimise opportunities for scientific studies and monitoring. Threats are minimised because large MPAs increase the resilience of the ecosystems and therefore protect associated conservational values for Pacific Islanders. Some challenges anticipated in implementing the Pacific Oceanscape relate to timeframe, funding integrity and sustain ability, harmonisation mechanisms within the existing national and regional institutions and programs and compliance and enforcement

Australia and the Convention for the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities (CRAMRA)

Australia, a leading Antarctic state that played a key role in negotiating the Convention for the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities, in May 1989 announced its opposition to the Convention and adoption instead of a World Park or Wilderness Reserve concept for Antarctica. This article examines possible environmental and economic reasons for Australia\u27s attitude, which is likely to have significant implications for the future of the Convention and for the Antarctic Treaty System as a whole. -Author

Fisheries subsidies, the WTO and the Pacific Island tuna fisheries

Focuses on fisheries trade, regulated under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures outside the World Trade Organization agreement. Suggests much stricter discipline is needed for the sector, led by the environmental interest, the USA and New Zealand. Relates fish stock depletion to subsides, which are not quantifiable, in order to create a free market and efficient producers. Points out that technology and high incomes created the fish stock depletion, so subsidies are irrelevant; while all World Trade Organization members subsidize fisheries, none can be found to attack it. Proposes new World Trade Organization disciplines for licensing, training and compensating fishermen, reducing effort and increasing fees, and for discouraging overfishing by foreign fleets. Concludes that new agreements should protect Pacific islands wishing to gain from their tuna stocks while protecting fish stocks

Exclusive economic zones and Pacific developing island states - who really gets all the fish?

The establishment of exclusive economic zones (EEZs), through the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), changed the allocation of fishing rights. These zones allocated all fishing rights within 200 nautical miles of land to neighbouring coastal States. This change dramatically increased sovereign rights for Pacific small island States. In many cases, these States, with limited terrestrial resources, were allocated large resource rich EEZs that had previously been dominated by distant water fishing States. Distant water fishing States, concerned that they would lose access to 85-90% of the world\u27s active fishing grounds, argued that the LOSC should impose obligations to ensure optimum utilisation of fisheries. Consequently, the LOSC required coastal States that were incapable of optimally utilising their EEZ to give other states access to any surplus through agreements or other arrangements. This study analyses fisheries catch data from the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) to determine the impact of EEZs on fishing activities within the WCPO. The study reports on the degree to which EEZs have transferred effort, catch and benefit from traditional distant water fishing states to Pacific island coastal States. The study reports on the differing interpretations, and the complications that have subsequently arisen, of coastal State jurisdiction and its obligations to ensure optimum utilisation. The study demonstrates that EEZs, despite allocating fishing rights to Pacific island coastal States, have changed little in real terms and distant water fishing States continue to reap the largest benefit from resources within these EEZs

Papua New Guinea\u27s accession to the 1951 convention and the 1967 protocol relating to the status of refugees

Papua New Guinea (PNG) acceded to the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol in 1986, after having initially declined to accept those instruments, which had been extended by the administering power, Australia. This article analyses the background to PNG\u27s accession, and the reasons for its reservations to various provisions. PNG has, for some years, received refugees from West Irian, where the authority of the Indonesian Government continues to be challenged by the OPM (the Free Papua Movement). Before 1984, refugee arrivals were sporadic and involved relatively small groups of people; between February and June 1984, however, over ten thousand West Papuans fled into PNG. Both security and socio-economic considerations led successive PNG Governments to decline to accede to the refugee instruments, or to classify West Papuans as refugees. It is doubtful, however, whether these concerns justify the reservations to articles 17(1), 21, 22(1), 31, 32 and 34 of the Convention, most of which are due to a misconstrction of the relevant terms. The reservations are largely unnecessary, and partially defeat the value of accession

The institutional framework for regional cooperation in ocean and coastal management in the South Pacific

Constrained by physical and economic factors, the States and Territories in the central and southwestern Pacific region (the Pacific Island States and Territories) have utilized regional cooperation in addressing many of the coastal and marine resources development issues facing the region. Regional cooperation in dealing with coastal and marine issues has been facilitated largely through the establishment of a number of regional organizations. This article discusses the institutional frameworks for regional cooperation in coastal and marine resources and environmental management by the Pacific Island States and Territories. The article also highlights efforts being made to achieve better harmonization of the roles and responsibilities of the various organizations