Cod wars Iceland. How unarmed Iceland Britain won in the war

Cause

Expansion of the exceptional economic zone of Iceland

Outcome

Victory Iceland.

Opponents Commander Forces side Losses

1 killed

In response to opposition to British fishing vessels, London sent three frigates to the shores of Iceland.

Icelanders declared British fishermen poachers and closed all ports and airfields for the UK. After the intervention intervention in the person of the NATO organization, the members of which were both countries, the British ships left the water of Iceland.

However, the conflict continued to grow. British fishermen refused to leave the Icelandic waters, and several ships of the British military fleet reappeared again from the coast of Iceland.

The British frigate opened fire on the patrol coast guard of Iceland, when the last patrol in the zone declared by the territorial waters of Iceland. As a result, one coast guard officer was killed, and the patrol boat was damaged.

Write a review about the article "Cod Wars"

Notes

Excerpt characterizing gracious wars

At that time, he received a letter from his wife, who begged him about a date, wrote about his sadness on him and about the desire to devote all his life to him.
At the end of the letter, she notified him that the other day would come to St. Petersburg from abroad.
Following the letter to the privacy of Pierre, one of the less than others respected by the brothers of the Masons broke, and bringing a conversation to the marital relationship of Pierre, in the form of a fraternal council, expressed him the idea that his rigor to his wife was unfair, and that Pierre retreats from the first rules of Mason not forgiving.
At the same time, his mother-in-law, the wife of Prince Vasilla, sent him, begging him at least a few minutes to visit her for negotiations on a very important case. Pierre saw that he was a conspiracy against him that he wanted to connect him with his wife, and it was not even unpleasant to him in that condition in which he was. He was still: Pierre nothing in life considered a great importance, and under the influence of the longing, which now worked on them, he did not value his freedom, nor his persistence in the punishment of his wife.
"No one is right, no one is to blame, it became and she is not to blame," he thought. - If Pierre did not immediately express the consent to the connection with his wife, then only because in a state of longing, in which he was located, he was not able to undertake anything. If the wife would come to him, he would now not drive her. Isn't it all the same in comparison with what Pierre occupied, live or not live with his wife?
Without answering anything to his wife, nor the mother-in-law, Pierre once late in the evening gathered on the road and went to Moscow to see Joseph Alekseevich. This is what Pierre wrote in his diary.
"Moscow, November 17th.
Now only came from benefactor, and I have a hurry to write down everything that I experienced. Joseph Alekseevich lives poorly and suffers the third year to painfully the bubble disease. No one ever heard from him the moan, or the words of Ropot. In the morning and until late at night, with the exception of the clock, in which he eats the simplest food, he works on science. He accepted me graciously and put on the bed on which he lay; I made him the sign of the Knights of the East and Jerusalem, he answered me the same, and with a meek smile asked me that I learned and acquired in Prussian and Scottish lips. I told him everything as I knew how to convey those foundations that I offered in our Petersburg bed and reported a bad reception made by me, and about the gap, which happened between me and brothers. Joseph Alekseevich, pretty pausing and thinking, to all this outlined me, who instantly highlighted me all the past and the whole future path, preparing for me. He surprised me, asking if I remember, I remember what the Trojak goal of the Order is: 1) in the storage and knowledge of the sacrament; 2) in purification and correction of oneself to perception of it and 3) in the correction of human race through the desire for such cleansing. What is the main and first goal of these three? Of course your own correction and cleansing. Only to this goal we can always strive regardless of all the circumstances. But at the same time, this goal also requires us the most difficulties, and therefore, I am mistaken by pride, we, I miss this goal, we do either for the sacrament, which is unworthy to perceive on the impurity of your own, or we do for the correction of the human race, when they are An example of abrasion and debauchery. The illuminatism is not a pure teaching precisely because it was fond of public activities and pride is filled. On this basis, Joseph Alekseevich condemned my speech and all my activities. I agreed with him in the depths of my soul. On the occasion of our family talk about my family matters, he told me: - The main responsibility of a true massion, as I told you, is to improve yourself. But often we think that by removing all the difficulties of our life, we will rather reach this purpose; On the contrary, my sovereign, he told me, only in the medium of secular unrest we can achieve three main goals: 1) self-knowledge, because a person can learn himself only through a comparison, 2) improvement, only it is achieved by the struggle, and 3) to achieve the main virtue - Love to death. Only the vicissitudes of life can show us to vshane and can assist - our innate love for death or revival to a new life. These words are all the more remarkable that Joseph Alekseevich, despite his grievous physical suffering, never burns life, but he loves death to which he, despite all the purity and height of his inner man, does not feel even ready. Then the benefactor explained to me quite the importance of the great square of the universe and indicated that the three-way and seventh number of the essence of the foundation of everything. He advised me not to remove from communicating with St. Petersburg brothers and, taking out only the post of 2nd degrees, try, distracting the brothers from the hobbies of pride, to turn them to the true path of self-knowledge and improvement. In addition, for myself I personally advised me to follow the most likely to follow myself, and with this goal gave me a notebook, the one in which I write and will insert all my actions in the future. "

An interesting story of victories in several shopping wars of tiny Iceland over the UK. Wins obsessed with perseverance and diplomacy. In Iceland there are no oil, gas, coal and even forests, and the country's agricultural potential, 11% of the territory of which the glaciers occupy is extremely limited. Fish for the country - strategic goods.

The first post-war conflict between the United Kingdom and Iceland began in 1952, when Iceland announced the expansion of forbidden for foreign fishermen waters from three to four miles. The British applied to the International Court of Justice, and so far there was a proceeding, banned Icelandic fishing vessels in their ports. This is a ban on a serious blow to the Icelandic economy: the United Kingdom was the largest market for a small Northern country.

And here the descendants of the Viking reserved the newly started cold war. Formed excess cod with enthusiasm began to buy the Soviet Union, thus calculated to increase its influence on albeit albeit, but one of NATO founding countries. A similar perspective was conquered by the United States, who also started purchasing large batches of Icelandic fish. As a result, joint Soviet-American imports compensated for damage caused by British sanctions.

This conflict ended in Iceland's victory. A country with a population of 160 thousand people won over the Great Power, one of the five states of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. In 1956, the United Kingdom was forced to recognize the Icelandic four-mile zone.

But that was only the beginning

First Crash War

The Icelandic Patrol Boater Albert is suitable for the British trawler Coventry in Westfjord. 1958

Inspired by success, already in 1958, Icelanders decided to expand their exceptional fishing zone once again, to 12 miles at once. But now it all started to them very unsuccessful: all other members of NATO opposed such unilateral actions. This time it did not cost without the participation of the military: the United Kingdom sent a combat ships to the shores of Iceland. In total, 53 ship of the Royal Military Fleet, which was opposed to seven Icelandic patrol boats and one flying boat PBY Catalina was attended during the first crackle war in operation on the protection of the fishing fleet.

The presence of foreign naval forces in the coastal waters of Iceland caused protests in the country. The British Embassy gathered demonstrations of angry Icelanders, but Ambassador Andrew Gilcrist met their ridicule, including the full volume of the recruitment of the bagpipes and military marches on gramophone.

The number of similar episodes grew. Understanding that in confrontation with the British fleet, Iceland has no chance, the authorities of the country resorted to blackmail. The Government of the Island state threatened to leave NATO and expel American troops from the country. Despite the overwhelming naval superiority, under the pressure of Americans, the United Kingdom was forced to recognize a 12-mile Icelandic exceptional economic zone. The only significant concession of Icelanders was the provision of the British rights to limited fishing in the external six miles from twelve.

The second crash war

Icelandic boat VER (left) is trying to trim trawls of the British Northern Reward trawler (right), and the British tug of Statesman (in the center) is trying to prevent him

Despite the victory overwhelmed in 1961, the situation with fish resources off the coast of Iceland continued to worsen. In the 1960s, herring, the catch of which fell from 8.5 million tons in 1958 was disappeared in the 1960s, the waters were disappeared in 1958. The length of the cod was also steadily declining, and according to the forecasts of biologists, she had to disappear after Salney for about 1980.

Iceland's attempts to attract the issue of international organizations with failed. Proposals for the introduction of quotas for fishing and creating closed areas of districts, where the populations could restore their number, or ignored, or went on endless discussions into industry committees.

In September 1972, the Government of Iceland to preserve fish stocks and increasing the share of the country in the total volume of Ulov expanded the boundaries of the marine exclusive economic zone of the country to 50 miles. This time the coast guard tactics was different. Instead of detaining British traverters or pull them out, the Icelanders cut the cables of fishing trawls with special cutters. After the Icelanders crossed the network to eighteen fishing vessels, in May 1973, British trawls left the water to which Iceland claimed. However, they soon returned, this time defended by the frigates of the Royal Fleet.

Icelanders again get out of her joker's sleeves. The government's government sounded the need to exit NATO, which should defend their members, and in practice there is no help. In September 1973, to save the situation in Reykjavik, the Secretary General of NATO Joseph Luns arrived. On October 3, the British warships were withdrawn, and on November 8, the parties to the conflict signed a temporary agreement. According to him, the fishing activity of the British inside the 50-mile zone was limited: their annual catch should not exceed 130,000 tons. The term of the agreement expired in 1975.

Iceland won again.

Third crackling war

Collision of the Icelandic Patrol Boat Baldur (Right) and the British frigate Mermaid

Even after the conclusion of the "truce" relationship between the UK and Iceland remained stretched. In July 1974, Forester, one of the largest British trawlers, was discovered by an Icelandic patrol boat with fishing fish within the 12-mile zone. After 100-kilometer chase and shelling with at least two hits, the trawler was captured and delivered to Iceland. The captain of the ship was convicted, sentenced to 30 days of imprisonment and 5 thousand pounds of fine.

On November 16, 1975, a third cracking war began. Honestly waiting for the end of the term of the agreement of 1973, Icelanders decided not to be broken and declared their exceptional seaside now the 200-mile coastal strip is now. To counteract British trawlers, they were able to set six patrol boats and two trawlers of Polish buildings, armed and re-equipped in coast guard ships.

In addition, they intended to purchase the Asheville patrol boats from the United States, and after the refusal even wanted to get Soviet guard ships of the project 35 - but this transaction did not take place. The British to protect 40 of their trawlers sent this time "Armada" of 22 frigates (however, at the same time from the coast of Iceland was not more than 9 British warships), 7 supply vessels, 9 tugs and 3 subsidiary ships.

The third crackling war lasted 7 months, until June 1976. She turned out to be the most rusting three - in its course there were 55 intentional clashes of ships of both countries. On February 19, 1976, Iceland ruined diplomatic relations with the United Kingdom.

The outcome of the last grain war was predictable. Having exhausted all the possibilities of confrontation with the UK (not counting the open announcement of the war), Iceland re-applied its "prohibited reception." Icelanders threatened to close the American base in Cablanca, which was the most important link in the defensive NATO system in the North Atlantic.

On June 2, 1976, with the mediation of the same Secretary General of NATO, Joseph Luns, a new agreement was concluded, which set the point in Icelandic-British graves. According to him, over the next 6 months, 24 British trawler could be within the 200-mile marine exclusive zone of Iceland.

Expansion of the Icelandic Exclusive Economic Zone.

After this period, the UK no longer had the right to catch fish inside the 200-mile zone without the permission of Iceland, thereby recognizing her new marine borders.

Bronze "Statue of Friendship" in English Kingston-Apon-Halle, established in 2006 as a sign of the final of reconciliation after grave wars. The second is the same statue stands in the Icelandic Village

Against the background of modern trade wars, I would like to look a little in history.

Diplomatic and later armed conflicts between the United Kingdom and Iceland, associated with the catch of fish, especially cod, began in 1952.

When fish resources in the White Sea and the coast of the Faroe Islands were exhausted in the mid-50s of the 20th century, British and West German fishermen rushed to Icelandic waters. Reykjavik scored anxious and accused London in destroying the population of Icelandic cod.
Iceland demanded an exclusive 4-mile catch zone around its territory. The United Kingdom answered this embargo on imports of Icelandic fish and other sanctions. From 1952 to 1958, the conflict remained in the diplomatic plane, so this period is called the "protototist war". However, since 1958, the conflict has moved to the hot phase of the armed conflict called "Cod Cod Wars".

The first crackle war (1958 - 1961), after expanding the zone from 4 to 12 nautical miles.
- The second crackling war (1972 - October 1973), after expanding the zone from 12 to 50 nautical miles
- Third Crash War (1975 - June 1976) Expanding up to 200 miles

Military actions, which began at the end of 1975, the Western European press called not otherwise as an "absurd war of friends." After the British fishermen refused to leave the 200-mile sea zone, the Military Courts of Icelandic Coast Guard began to destroy British fishing nets. The first serious incident occurred in December, when the Icelandic frigate Thor blocked the three British ships path. "Military vessel of IVCF Air Force opened fire on unarmed British trawlers, the British BBC News Agency reported. - As a result of the shelling, the frigate Thor himself received serious damage, and British vessels remained unharmed. " According to the Icelandic authorities, three British ships from different sides surrounded the military frigate and went on it to Taran. The British retreated only when Thor was on the verge of flooding.

In February 1976, after a series of incidents, as a result of which faster British ships overtook and taranized the Court of Icelandic Coast Guard, Reykjavik announced a break of diplomatic relations with the UK. "This is a guerrilla war on the sea," the situation of Iceland's Prime Minister Geir Hallgrimsson commented. Icelandic flotilla in the midst of the conflict consisted of only 7 obsolete frigates, while 22 modern frigates, 7 auxiliary and 6 towing ships came to the rescue of British fishermen. But, despite the unequal forces, success, according to the observers of those years, was generally on the side of the Icelandic flotilla.

"The Icelandic Mini-Armada is having fun in a cheerful temper and acts on the principle of" make an enemy life unbearable, "Spiegel wrote in March 1976. - British frigates are waiting for Icelanders as cats in a mouse hole. And if at midnight some sounds slip into radio signals, English sailors know: approaching "Fucking Bastards" (Kids Sukina). " Iceland tactics were that they lured the enemy closer to the fjords, and then shelled enemy frigates. The British authorities accused the Icelandic Military in the "extreme cruelty." It was reported that Icelandic ships more than once opened fire for defeat, shooting in British sailors.

By March 1976, public opinion in Iceland began to put pressure on authorities, demanding immediate exit from NATO and the withdrawal of the Alliance military bases from the country. The culmination of numerous protest shares was blocking the entrance to the military base in Keflavik, which at that time was considered one of the most important outposts of the Alliance in the fight against Soviet submarines. Washington was hoping that Icelandic politicians would not go on the demonstrators. Those unexpectedly was when the algent was almost unanimously adopted a resolution in which the immediate expulsion of foreign military from the island. It is said that at this moment the head of the White House called the British Prime Minister of James Callaghan (James Callaghan) with the requirement "by any forces to settle the conflict with Icelanders." In early June 1976, the parties signed an agreement in which Great Britain recognized the 200-mile Icelandic zone and, despite the stormy public protests, limited fishing in the North Atlantic
This war cost almost no victims. The British and Icelanders reported about several dozen wounded. One employee of Icelandic Coast Guard was also killed (in June 1973, the Egir patrol boat (æGIR) took the Szillla ESMINIS (HMS Scyl), during a collision from electric shock, an Icelandic engineer was killed, which repaired the housing - its welding machine poured water.)

As fish stocks exhausted, the competition between fishing fleets of various states was aggravated. According to the UN, now more than 100 countries are involved in conflicts for the right of fish mining.

Over the past decades, such conflicts arise constantly, and periodically support for fishermen is provided by the military. The last example of this kind was the conflict between Russia and Norway. Italians cut the chains of Greek fishermen in the Mediterranean Sea. China's warships and Vietnam exchanged volley in the South China Sea, Burmese Storozhevik Skilled Thailand Syaker, etc. Fish conflicts periodically arose between the European Union and Morocco, Taiwan and Argentina, Russia and Japan, etc.

Most often conflicts arise between neighboring states that have access to the sea. However, practice shows that such disputes are easiest to be regulated. The situation is complicated in the case of fishing, traverters belonging to the state located away from the Liva zone. Six states - Russia, Japan, Spain, Poland, South Korea and Taiwan - accounts for up to 90% of the total fish in remote waters. The most suffer from the aliens Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Iceland and New Zealand.

Crack wars

The conflict between Iceland and the UK lasted several decades. British trawlers and seiners led the prey near the Icelandic coast, and Iceland (initially Denmark, part of which Iceland was until 1944) tried to squeeze them from there.

The "First Crash War" broke out in 1893, when the Government of Denmark announced that foreign fishermen had no right to fish within 13 miles (approximately 24 km from the coast of Iceland and the Faroe Islands). This was done primarily to stop British fishermen, who, however, demonstratively continued to fish in the forbidden zone. The UK did not accept this condition, as according to the British, it could become an infectious example for other countries of the North Sea, which could cause a serious blow to the Fishing Industry of England. Danish warships were arrested by violators and sold their ships and cargoes from the hammer. In 1899, the crisis reached a peak when the Danish combat ships stopped the British Caspian trawler. The captain of the trawler agreed to go on board the Danish Storozhevik, but ordered his assistant to accept the command and hide. Trying to stop the trawler, the Danes fired him and caused damage to him, but the intruder eluded. Caspian captain appeared before the Danish court and was sentenced to 30 days of imprisonment for illegal fishing and an attempt to prevent justice. The damaged vessel returned to England, after which the British seal began the campaign in defense of fishermen, calling for the Navy to protect them from the broken Danes. Diplomatic methods for resolving conflicts did not give a result for a long time, as a result, British fishermen were forced to stop fishing in this part of the Atlantic. The problem was resolved after the beginning of the First World War.

The "Two Crash War" occurred in 1958, when Iceland expanded its jurisdiction zone over marine areas from 4 miles to 12 (approximately 19 km) from its coast. The United Kingdom was not able to prevent Iceland's actions and in 1961 he concluded a bilateral agreement with Iceland, who recognized this decision (Iceland's similar agreement concluded with Germany).

In 1972, the "third cracking war" began - Iceland unexpectedly increased its jurisdiction zone over the marine territories up to 50 miles (approximately 80 km). Great Britain and Germany protests and appealed to the International Court of Justice. The court recognized that coastal states cannot conduct ocean borders based on only their national legislation. However, Iceland achieved the fact that the British were forced to observe certain catch quotas. For this, a bilateral contract was concluded.

Immediately after the expiration of the term of this agreement began the "Fourth Crash War", which proceeded from 1975 to 1976. During this period of time, two countries participating in the NATO block \\ Nato were actually on the verge of war. Iceland announced the zone of its jurisdiction to the marine space adjacent to its shores for 200 miles (about 320 km). The conflict began with the fact that the workers of the Iceland coast guard service cut the fishing nets of British trawlers. After a number of other clashes between Icelandic and British ships and trawlers, the case took an unexpected turn when Iceland threatened to close an important military base of NATO, located in the city of Keflavik. As a result, Great Britain agreed to keep his fishermen outside the zone of 200 miles from the Icelandic coast and reduce the number of fish caught by them. As a result, about 1.5 thousand English fishermen and 7.5 thousand workers of the United Kingdom's food enterprises remained without work. In fact, the United Kingdom lost all four "grass wars".

Tunty wars

This conflict began after Japan announced that she was starting fishing for scientific purposes near the West Coast of Australia. Japanese trawlers, mainly mined tuna and, according to Australia and New Zealand, the volume of fishing was very far from "scientific". Australia and New Zealand are trying to stop Japan, including applying force in relation to Japanese seiners.

Another war for a tuna took place in the Biscay bay, where the fishery led Spanish and French fishermen. At the same time, the Spaniards struggled to catch fish in French waters, and the French are in Spanish. In some cases, military fleets of both countries supported "their" fishermen.

Crab war

It comes from the 1980s between South and North Korea, which are produced in the yellow sea delicious types of crabs. Both countries cannot agree on zones where it is possible to make fish and fish products. As a result, North Korean courts come to the South Korean economic zone, and South Korean - North Korean. Periodically, combat ships of both states enter the conflict. Each year, as a result of the use of weapons, dozens of fishermen are also killed as a result of the use of weapons of weapons.

Squid War

Between the UK and Argentina there is a dispute for fishing zones around Falkland (or Malvinian) islands. The United Kingdom began the colonization of the Falkland Islands in 1833, immediately after the Argentine settlers were expelled from there. In 1982, Argentina tried to establish his sovereignty over Falkland, but was defeated. In 1990, both countries restored diplomatic relations, but the Falkland question continues to be the cause of friction. In 1994, the United Kingdom expanded its economic zone around Falklands to 850 miles (approximately 1.4 thousand km), explaining this by the need to protect the squid population from predatory fishing. In response, Argentina made amendments to its constitution, which retracted the right of Argentina to mining fish in the area of \u200b\u200bFalklands. Military ships of both states are demonstratively present in the disputed area, guarding Tolliers. The conflict acquires special importance with the increase in prices for squid and the depletion of traditional areas of fishing in North Atlantic.

Halfus war

In 1986, Spain became part of the European Union and agreed to abide by a 10-year-old moratorium on fishing near the coast of Europe (this was done to restore the livestock of fishing fish). Having lost traditional fishing places, Spanish fishermen moved to the shores of Canadian Newfoundland. In 1994, Canada, in turn, introduced a moratorium on catching fish near the northern coast of Newfoundland within the borders of its 200-mile economic zone. Along the way, Canada and a number of states whose vessels led fishery in the area, agreed to establish fish catch quotas (quotas allocated by Canadians were more than quotas allocated to all other countries to participate in the agreement). Offended States - members of the European Union tried to make changes to the size of quotas, but Canada stood on her.

On March 9, 1995, the coast of Canada in the large bank zone (extensive shared off the coast of Newfoundland) three Canadian patrols began the persecution of the Spanish Estai trawler, which was suspected of violating international fishing legislation. Persecution lasted several hours. Navy Canada was given a state of combat readiness. Canadian Prime Minister even allowed military sailors to apply weapons. In the end, already in international waters, the Canadian watchwood Cape Roger managed to sit Estai onto the tail. Seeing that Estai is not going to stop, Cape Roger, before that detained five other Spanish trawlers with the help of waterballs, applied combat weapons. They produced four warning queues from the large-caliber machine gun in the direction of Estai, the captain of the Spanish fishing vessel was given five minutes to stop the ship - otherwise Cape Roger threatened to open fire for defeat. Only after that Estai surrendered. The Canadian inspector found that 79% of caught halibuts do not reach the length of 38 cm. And 6% is less than 17cm (it was allowed to detect adult halotus lengths from 60 cm long). In addition, the analysis of the ship's journal showed many violations associated with the concealment of the real size of the shy village. The Estai Captain was charged with a illegal fishing, preventing detention, fishing equipment and to stop after the authorities' requirement (it was issued secured at $ 8 thousand). After this incident, Spanish and Portuguese fishing trawlers left the zone of the big banks.

On March 13, Spain sent their warships to the Newfoundland zone to protect fishermen. The European Union fell on the side of Spain, calling the actions of Canadians with Pirates and threatened to introduce economic sanctions against Canada. On March 28, 1995, Spain sent a lawsuit to the International Court of Justice in the Hague, argumenting that Canada had no right to arrest the Spanish vessel in international waters. In turn, Canada informed the court that the latter does not have the right to resolve this dispute, since Canada has introduced a reservation in its declaration on May 10, 1994, according to which the International Court has jurisdiction in solving all types of conflicts, with the exception of those that arose as a result of Canada's efforts to protect the rules for the conservation of marine resources in the northwestern part of the Atlantic Ocean. The court recognized the authority of the statement of Canada and refused to consider Spain's claim. In September 1995, the conflicting parties reached an agreement and revised the amount of quotas in favor of Europeans.

Hallery wars passed not only between Canada and Spain. By a similar scenario, conflicts between Argentina and Taiwan were held, as well as China and Marshall Islands.

Salmon War

The fish spoiled the relationship even between such close allies as the USA and Canada, when the specified countries could not agree on the distribution of salmon quotas. The main problem is that salmon, upholstered in the ocean, nevertheless, spawn in fresh waters, thereby generating difficulties in determining the country, which is the owner of this type of fish. Traditionally it was believed that the owner's right belongs to the country in whose territory the salmon was born, that is, the country on the territory of which salmon caviar was postponed, it has the right to extract salmon. However, since when migrating salmon from one country, it is mixed with salmon, to determine the "place of birth" of one or another fish is almost impossible.

Canadians demand from the United States to reduce the number of worship of the night, which migrates the Fraser (Canada) river pool. Americans, in turn, demand from Canadians to cut the cawrome catch, floating near the island of Vancouver, so that more fish can return to the territorial waters of the United States. In 1985, a Canadian-American aloint fishing agreement was signed, according to which quotas for catching this fish were established, subsequently replaced by the fee for the use of Canadian territorial water by American seins. Nevertheless, the implementation of this agreement faced a variety of difficulties. Canada and the United States accused each other in violations of the agreement.

In 1997, the term of this agreement has expired, and the United States and Canada resumed negotiations in order to permit the problem of distribution of quotas. However, negotiations were not crowned with success. On May 27, 1997, American trawler Christina was detained by the Canadian authorities (as it is believed, it was done in order to demonstrate the severity of Canada's intentions to Washington). According to the evidence of the Canadian side, the American vessel did not warn Canadians about their occurrence of Canada's territorial waters. Canada has tightened the entry regime in its waters, demanding the identification information from all maritime courts. The Canadian side argued that US coast guard services also demand from the Canadian courts of immediate alerts on the entrance to the territorial waters of the United States. US State Department \\ State Department immediately announced the termination of negotiations until the "constructive and friendly atmosphere" required for discussions is formed.

The conflict reached the point that in July 1997, about 200 Canadian trawlers blocked the road to the American ship Malaspina, which was trying to enter the Canadian port with a cargo of fresh salmon and several hundred tourists on board. At the same time, Canadian ships detained two American trawlers who caught fish without obtaining the appropriate permission. The conflict with Malaspina was allowed after the United States threatened to prevent American tourists to this area of \u200b\u200bCanada.

In 1999, the United States and Canada entered into a new agreement - the US quotas for the extraction of salmon were reduced, in addition, the United States agreed to allocate significant funds for the restoration of the livestock of this fish.

The question of determining the size of the part of the sea, which was under the jurisdiction of coastal states, was one of the most difficult in the history of international law.

Up to 18th century, the method was practiced, according to which the border of the "maritime possessions" of state was limited to the line of the horizon, visible from the shore. Nevertheless, since the 18th century, many countries began to apply the method according to which the border of the maritime ownership of the state was considered the point to which the weapon of the coastal country could take. In fact, the more developed country in the production of weapons, the larger area of \u200b\u200bthe sea she could control. Nevertheless, in practice, the subject territory was limited to the distance of the flight of the cannon nucleus from the shore - on average, 3 miles (approximately 4.8 km). This idea belonged to the Dutch publicist Cornelius von Binkershok, who already at the beginning of the 17th century offered to apply a cannation of a cannonic shot to determine the marine territories of coastal countries.

By the end of the 18th and early 19th century, the United States, as well as some countries of Western Europe declared their territory a marine space extending precisely three miles from the coast. By the end of the 19th century, the development of technology was allowed to increase artillery long range of up to 10-12 miles (16-19.3 km). It was at this time that in international law the concept of "adjacent aquatorium" began. In 1776, England declared part of the sea at a distance of 12 miles from his shores "Customs Zone". In 1799, the United States followed the example of England, in 1817 - France, and in 1909 - Russia.

The principles of "free sea" and determining adjacent waters with the help of a cannon shot remained the basis of international law in the use of the ocean until 1945. Then the United States established new rules of fishing and resource mining, located on the seabed, in the waters adjacent to the United States. The distance that the US owned by the United States was much greater than the usual 3 miles.

Before the adoption of the UN Convention on the Law of the Law (1982), various countries tried to establish their jurisdiction over the marine territories, and in each case the dimensions of these territories differed. Australia, Germany, Qatar, Great Britain and the United States adhered to 3 miles (5.5 km), Algeria, Cuba, India, Indonesia and the USSR considered their territorial waters a distance of 12 maritime miles (22.2 km), and Cameroon, Gambia, Madagascar and Tanzania - 50 miles (92.5 km). Some countries of Latin America, in particular Chile and Peru, announced their claims to marine areas adjacent to their shores to a distance of 200 miles (approximately 370 km). In 1952, Chile, Ecuador and Peru signed the Declaration in which the distance in 200 nautical miles declared their jurisdiction. Nicaragua joined them, and, subsequently, the similar standard was established by the African state of Editor-Leone. Now the territorial waters of coastal countries recognize the sea space of 12 miles (19.2 km).

Evolution of marine laws

The sea and oceans wash the shores of 150 countries. Naturally, the use of the sea gave rise to many international conflicts, the resolution of which was difficult to find due to the lack of any global ocean use agreements.

In ancient times, relations between countries in the art were regulated according to the so-called "coastal right" (it is believed that it has developed a spontaneously): Residents or rulers of this coastal area were owners of all vessels and ships nailed to the shore as a result of shipwrecks, abandoned courts, and Also transported by their goods, in other words, all that was thrown by the waves ashore. Naturally, many inhabitants of coastal areas, in the hope of increasing the number of marine "gifts", began to enter into criminal collusion with pirates and pilots, create false beacons with the aim of knocking down the ships from the right course and cause shipwreck. Such actions applied a huge damage, and many states adopted laws, cruelly punishable persons who caused shipwrecks for their intentional actions. International treaties were also signed, which also implied mutual assistance to the sea.

Maritime legislation existed in many seaworthy countries of the world for the 10th century. At the end of the 10th - early 11th century, the Italian city-State Amalfi had a complex arch of maritime laws, which became a model for the maritime legislation of Mediterranean countries. There was a very developed "Maritime Code" existed among states and cities entering the Ganza Shopping Union, who regulated trade and maritime navigation of the Baltic and Northern seas in the 17th century. Over time, some countries have had new interests in some countries that have particularly succeeded in nautical business. England announced his claims on sea routes, running through the North Sea, Sweden and Denmark tried to get similar rights to the Baltic. Hazel Christie, the author of the Encyclopedia "Maritime Law" \\ Law of the Sea, notes that such appetites of the Mediterranean states actually made the Mediterranean Sea closed for navigation for ships of all other countries.

The new impulse of this process was given great geographical discoveries, since in this case it was about the ownership of not just waves and fish, but wealth of newly opened lands. In the 16th century, an attempt to divide the Atlantic Ocean on the spheres of influence was made by the then superpowers - Portugal and Spain. The arbiter in this case was Pope, who issued the appropriate Bulla in 1493. In 1494, Spain and Portugal were concluded by the famous Tordesigal Treaty, dividing the territories opened by Europeans (and water area) to the Spanish and Portuguese. The demarcation line took place through both poles of the Earth and crossed the Atlantic Ocean at a distance of about 2 thousand km from the western part of the islands of the Green Cape. The Earth, located east of this line, was recognized by the possessions of Portugal, to the West - Spain. The consequence of the first round-the-world travel of the Spaniard of Fernan Magellan was the Saragoz Agreement of 1529, which delimited the zones of the influence of Spain and Portugal in the Pacific Ocean. The eastern hemisphere was divided along the line, distinguished from Molukky Islands by 1.4 thousand km. east. Asia became the sphere of interests of Portugal (the exception was only the Philippine Islands, the place of the death of Magellan), and Oceania, i.e., the territory of the Pacific Ocean, was part of the influence of Spain. The Spaniards and Portuguese received the right to pursue and seize all foreign vessels passing through the "their" territory, to carry out all sorts of inspections, to impose a customs duty, as well as to judge the members of the team of a foreign ship in their own laws.

Such a separation of the World Oceans has somewhat improved the extremely hostile relationship between Portugal and Spain, nevertheless, these powers were involved in conflict with England, France and Holland, who also began to develop new continents by this time. As maritime trade develops, the need to cancel restrictions on the use of marine spaces. One of the first supporters of such cancellation was the well-known Dutch politician and lawyer Hugo Grotia (1583-1645). It is on the ideas of the throat based on modern maritime legislation. In his famous work, the Free Sea \\ Mare Liberum, published in 1609, the groties appealed to the rulers and the free nations of the whole Christian world. The groties argued that the Dutch had the legal right to participate in trade with East India and urged to deprive the Portuguese and Spaniards monopoly on marine movements. The groties questioned the idea itself that a certain state is entitled to possession of the oceans.

Christopher Joyner \\ Christofer Joyner, author of the monograph "International Law in the 21st Century" \\ International Law In The 21st Century. Rules for Global Governance notes that Russia has made a significant contribution to the development of the concept of "free sea". In 1588, Tsar Fedor John refused to fulfill the requirement of the British to close the White Sea for the passage of the ships of third countries. The Nesteadsky Agreement, concluded between Russia and Sweden after the Northern War in 1721, according to which, both countries were provided with equal rights on maritime movement and maritime trade. In fact, Russia received the right to leave the Baltic Sea into an open ocean and engage in international trade.

In 1780, during the war of the US independence, Russia made a declaration of armed neutrality in which she appealed to England, France and Spain. One of the provisions of the Declaration was a proposal to ensure the unobstructed passage of shopping ships of neutral states through seaports that are between the territories of enemy countries. As a result, Russia has received the opportunity to use the Mediterranean ports of Spain. The Declaration has become a precedent agreement that ensured the safety of trade ships of neutral states under war. Moreover, if in wartime there is freedom to move the ships of neutral states, then, therefore, in peacetime, the right to free movement across the World Ocean received everything without exception in the world.

By the end of the 1950s, a significantly increased number of conflicts prompted the United Nations in 1958 to convene the first UN conference on international maritime law dedicated to the discussion of such issues as regulating the continental shelf and territorial waters, as well as fishery problems.

As a result of the conference, the Convention on the territorial waters and the adjacent zones was adopted, according to which countries were given the right to qualify for complete jurisdiction in territorial waters (12 miles or 22.2 km from their coast) surrounding the territory of this country. Jurisdiction applied to water, underwater space, seabed, as well as airspace over waters. Foreign vessels received the right, the so-called "peaceful passage" (a peaceful passage is considered a foreign ship through territorial waters, as a result of which the world is not violated, good order or security of coastal countries).

The Fisheries and Conservation Convention of the World Ocean meant the right of all nations of the world to engage in fishing. The Convention also demanded that states of a certain policy of conservation in accordance with the principle of maximum sustainable production. Nevertheless, the first UN conference on the international maritime law was ineffective, since most countries did not join her.

The Open Sea Convention was also adopted, which guaranteed certain freedom to use the World Ocean. Rights on the use of marine spaces, laying underwater cable trails and pipelines were provided with not only marine countries, but also countries that do not have access to the sea. In this case, countries having marine access should have been provided to its countries in the depths of sushi. The coastal states were granted the right to persecute foreign courts whose crews violated their legislation. The Convention also envisaged measures against piracy and slave trade.

The conference also adopted the Convention on the Continental Shelf. For the first time, a clear definition was given to the concept of the continental shelf, according to which the shelf is considered the surface and subsoil of the seabed in areas adjacent to the bank of the continent or island, but being outside the zone of territorial waters to a depth of 200 m or behind this limit before the place to which the depth Allows the development. Nevertheless, the Convention on the Continental Shelf, signed in 1958, became an anachronism, not even having time to enter into force, since in the early 1960s the technological capabilities of many countries allowed to produce production from the seabed, whose depth was much higher than the above 200 meters.

In 1960, the Second United Nations Conference on International Maritime Law was convened in order to solve the problem of determining the width of the continental shelf, as well as clarify the rights of coastal countries. Even despite the participation of delegations of 87 countries, this conference was also unable to achieve the desired result, primarily due to disagreements between the "rich" and "poor" countries. The developing countries have concerns that the "rich" states possessing the most modern technologies use all the resources of the ocean before the "poor" states will be able to present their rights to mining resources.

In 1968, the UN created a seabed-based peace committee, which became an organizational basis for convening the UN CONFERENCE on International Maritime Right. The conference was held from 1973 to 1982. Its main product was the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which fully entered into force on November 16, 1994.

Marine Constitution

The UN Convention on the Maritime Right has become a kind of "maritime constitution", which regulates the use of the ocean and the relationship between the seaflings and the use of the resources of the sea. By 2005, 145 states of the world were participants in the Convention.

The Convention recorded a list of "marine freedoms". Sea freedoms, however, are not absolute - all states are obliged to respect the interests of other countries in the process of implementing these freedoms.

The Convention recognized as the territorial waters of the coastal countries the marine space distance of 12 miles (19.2 km). In this zone, coastal countries have complete jurisdiction. Courts and ships of foreign states have the right "peaceful passage" through these territories. At the same time, military ships also have the right "peaceful passage" (in the territorial waters of foreign countries, submarines are obliged to move on the surface of the water with the national flag of their country). Within 12 miles, coastal countries have ownership of all living and non-residential ocean resources. In addition to the above territorial waters, the Convention also provides for the presence of "adjacent waters" with a distance of 24 miles (38.4 km), which should allow states to conduct effective immigration, sanitary, customs and environmental policies.

Thanks to the Convention, the term "Special Economic Zone" entered the appeal. Each coastal state has the right to claim a special economic zone with a distance of 200 nautical miles (370 km), adjacent to its own coast, within which it has the right to explore, exploit and manage alive and non-resident resources. Within its special economic zones of the state, the right to regulate construction works, as well as the use of the already existing infrastructure in the ocean for economic, scientific and environmental purposes. Nevertheless, coastal countries do not have the right of ownership of the very territory of the sea or its resources within the special economic zone. In these areas, all countries have the right to build pipelines and laying cable tracks.

For states fully consisting of islands, such as Philippines, Indonesia, Maldives and Seychelles, the Convention provides for a special status - "State-Archipelag". The distance of territorial and adjacent waters, as well as special economic zones for such countries, is counted from the most extreme point of the most extreme island. The specified principle applies only to the islands, which themselves are sovereign states, and are not part of any mainland country.

Open aquatic space refers to the oceanic and maritime territories outside the national jurisdictions and outside the territories of the inner water of states, such as rivers, lakes, bays and straits. All countries, including those who do not have their own way out to the sea, have the right to navigate in open waters. At the same time, there are some rules in the field of protection of marine life and prevent pollution of the marine environment. Military and state ships are obliged to show the flag of the country they belong. All civil and military air vehicles also have the right to free flight through open water spaces. All countries of the world have the right to engage in open waters, but should also adhere to their obligations under international agreements, as well as to comply with the rights of coastal countries. Any country of the world has the right to build pipelines and cable trails along the bottom of the ocean, as well as conducting research activities in open waters, if this activity has peaceful goals and does not hinder international navigation.

The provisions of the Convention also regulate some other features of international navigation, in particular, marine navigation in international seabed straits. The problem of regulating marine navigation in the territories of international straits has acquired a special relevance during the Cold War. The main marine powers, such as the USSR, USA and the United Kingdom, tried to provide their ships to their ships through the international marine straits. On the other hand, the countries bordering the straits, tried to prolobate such a concept according to which they could at any time refuse to pass through the sheds of those courts that can represent any danger. Among such countries were Spain and Morocco (Gibraltar Strait), Turkey (Bosphorus and Dardanell), Iran and Oman (Ormuz Strait), as well as Indonesia and Malaysia (Malack Strait).

As part of the Convention, a compromise solution was found, according to which the concept of a "transit passage" was introduced. Today in the world there are 135 strategic international straits width of less than 24 miles (38.4 km) provided for the unimpeded passage of maritime courts of all countries of the world. All sea and aircraft have the right to pass through the strait data. Submarines have the right to swim data from water under water. In turn, countries bordering international straits received the right to develop the regime of the maritime, as well as the right to regulate environmental standards and the process of resource mining in the zone of the strands.

The preservation of the living resources of the sea is also one of the main components of the Convention. Although all countries are given the right to maintain fishing, the Convention obliges countries to cooperate with each other in the field of conservation and management of alive marine resources. All crews of fishing ships must adhere to the obligations taken by their countries. Coastal countries, in turn, are obliged to provide such conditions under which living resources within special economic zones will not be threatened with disappearance.

Another area of \u200b\u200bregulation within the framework of the Convention is the conduct of research and development on the sea. Western countries advocated freedom of research with the condition that researchers will be obliged to notify the goal of their research. Developing countries, on the contrary, advocated such a system that would imply a formal permit from countries in special economic zones of which research should be conducted. The convention has actually defended the position of developing countries to dissatisfaction with most developed countries, as in accordance with its provisions, official permits must be obtained for research activities in the special economic zones of states. However, after receiving a request for research work in its marine areas, countries have no right to define their response to basely, and in case of refusal, they are obliged to argue it. To obtain permission, any research work must be exclusively peaceful.

Very painful was the problem of mining mineral resources from the seabed. Search response to a simple question: "Who has the right to develop a seabed in order to extract resources?" took a lot of time. One group of states (mainly industrially developed) insisted that these activities have the right to engage in those countries that have the necessary technical and economic funds for this. Another group (first of all, developing countries) urged the creation of an international regime, which would ensure that part of the revenues received from the mining of resources from the seabed, was distributed among the most needy countries. According to the Convention, the resources underlying the open ocean are the property of all mankind, and no country can apply for owning them or any of them. Western countries saw in the above principle manifestation of the ideology of socialism and did not hurry to join the agreement. In 1990, the UN Secretary-General began a series of consultations with interested countries regarding possible changes in the Convention, which, four years later, led to the signing of an agreement, which was an integral part of the Law Convention. The industrialized countries were able to block the adoption of any disagreeable decision, and corporations engaged in mining miners at the seabed received a number of financial elections.

Cod: Body length - up to 1.8 m; In the fishery, fish are dominated by a length of 40-80 cm, at the age of 3-10 years. The back of the back from greenish-olive to the buoy with small brown spectacles, belly white. Cod is one of the most important fishing fish. Its liver rich in fat (up to 74%) is a source of fish oil (animal fat derived from a large, weight of 1.3-2.2 kg, liver) and raw materials for the production of popular canned food.

The story of how small fleet of Iceland, consisting of only several patrol boats, won the UK royal military fleet, may seem absolutely fantastic. However, Icelanders consider otherwise. Cod wars, in which this victory was obsessed, are the source of the national pride of the small northern people. Justice should notice that the victory in these conflicts was obsessed primarily with Icelandic diplomats and politicians. But this does not in any way detract from the courage and determination of seafarers of Icelandic coast guard, boldly standing on the path of British frigates.

This is how it actually happened ...

Wars for seafood

Huge resources of the world ocean, alas, are not infinite, and this applies even to theoretically renewable fish. Their predatory operation leads to reserves and provokes numerous conflicts between fishermen from different countries, which periodically support and military. In recent decades, conflicts caused by the fish and other seafood, arose around the world.

In the Indian Ocean between Japan and Australia, an undeclared permanent tunzaya war is underway. North and South Korea lead the crab war. In the Atlantic in the 1990s, Spain and Canada led a halt war. Argentina and the United Kingdom around the controversial falklands voluntarily divide squids, and even friendly US and Canada in the 80s-90s of the 20th century spoiled relationships due to salmon fish - Narki and Kizhi.

British fishing vessels detained in the French territorial waters in La Manne during the "Wars for Sea Scallop" ("Scallop Wars") in 2012

The most extended time from all the "fish" conflicts is a series of graver wars flowing in the North Atlantic. Moreover, sometimes they passed literally in a hemisphere from the transition to a real armed conflict. Usually, "gracious wars" is called three conflicts of the second half of the XX century between the UK and Iceland. At the same time, Icelandic historians refer them to a single "chain" of British-Icelandic conflicts, which are numbering ten episodes, "Wars". And the very first of which dates from the beginning of the 15th century, when England violated the Norwegian monopoly on trade with Iceland (at that time - the Norwegian ownership).
At the end of the XIX century, when Iceland was already possession of the Kingdom of Denmark, the conflict around the rich fish of Icelandic waters almost led to the Danish-British war. In 1893, Denmark unilaterally announced the closure of the 50 mile zone for foreign fishermen around the shores of Iceland and the Faroe Islands. The British did not recognize this claim, fear that such a precedent would lead to similar actions from other states around the North Sea, and continued to send fishing vessels to the shores of Danish possessions. There should be a slight digression here, because the issue of economic and political control over the coastal seaspace is complex and ambiguous.

Territorial waters

Most worlds have access to the sea. It is quite natural that the use of the World Ocean has repeatedly generated conflicts. The question of the dissemination of the jurisdiction of coastal states on the adjacent areas of extensive reservoirs was one of the most difficult for international law. But at the very beginning everything was quite simple. From ancient times, the border of the "marine possessions" was traditionally determined by the line of the horizon, which the observer saw from the shore.

Cornelius Wang Binkershok, President of the High Court of Holland and Zealand

At the beginning of the XVIII century, Dutch lawyer Cornelius Van Binkershok put forward the rationalization idea. Stripping from the fact that the state may apply for coastal water control if it can carry out effective control over them, Van Binkershok proposed the width of the territorial waters to determine the cannastal shot. At that time, the cannon nuclei could fly away from the coast of no more than three marine miles - about 5.5 kilometers.

Bankershok bath offer called "The Rule of Cannon Shot" for a couple of centuries became a generally accepted international norm for
definitions of territorial water. True, he had certain disadvantages. First, different states had a different level of technological development. And it was the cause of explicit inequality: the more powerful guns had a country, the more to the larger portion of the sea, she distributed their sovereignty. Secondly, the range of artillery constantly increased.
As a result, in addition to the three-mile coastal coastal zone, which states declared part of their territory, a 12-mile (22.2 km) customs zone appeared. Subsequently, especially after World War II, many states declared their own and much larger areas of the World Ocean. Gambia, Madagascar and Tanzania "captured" 50 mile (92.6 km), and Chile, Peru, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Sier-Leone - 200-mile coastal spaces.

The situation of the countries of the world in relation to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Dark green color - states that ratified the Convention;
Light green - states that have signed, but not ratifying the Convention;
Gray - states that have not signed the Convention.

The countries of the world managed to come to a common denominator only by 1994, when the UN Convention on the Maritime Rights entered into force. Currently, the Convention has been ratified by the overwhelming majority of states - from among the major seaside countries to it did not join the United States, Turkey, Venezuela, Peru, Syria and Kazakhstan. According to it, the territorial waters that the sovereignty of the coastal state extends is the marine space of 12 miles width. In addition, countries have priority economic rights in 200-mile (370.4 kilometers) of the exceptional economic zone.

British-Danish Crash War

However, back to our cod. As we remember, British shipowners in the 1890s decided to ignore the attempt to expand their territorial waters. In response to this, the Danish warships, patrolling the coastal waters of Iceland and Farer, began to detain trawlers and accompany them into their ports. There the British were fined, and their catch was confiscated. For some time, the British abstained from fishing in the zone closed Danes. However, the demand for fish in the UK grew, having increased from 1896 to 1899 to a quarter. And the prohibited waters were very rich on the cod and other commercial species. And everything returned to the circles their own - the British ignored the ban, and the Danes were penalized with varying success.

In April 1899, it came to shooting. British Caspian trawler off the coast of the Faroe Islands was detained by the Danes. Captain Trawler Johnson switched to the board of the Danish patrol ship, but before this ordered the assistant to pass the ship. Trying to stop the surprising trawler, the Danes opened fire on it and caused damage, but the British managed to slip away. Detained Johnson was tried in Torskhavn, the capital Farer, and sentenced to thirty days of arrest, who served on a diet from water and bread.

Capital of Faroe Islands Torskhavn in 1898 or 1899

After these events, a turn of Great Britain came to remember that she has a military fleet, and the strongest in the world. British "Country Diploma" - the demonstrative presence of the Royal Navy in Danish Waters - allowed to solve the problem quickly and (for the British) effectively. The 1901 Agreement established the width of the territorial waters of Iceland and Farer to the traditional three miles. On this conflict, until the time-time, the first world world war contributed to the considerable extent.

The beginning of the conflict of Iceland and the United Kingdom

After in 1940, Germany occupied Denmark, the British landed in Iceland. Next year, the island's control passed to the United States, and in 1944 the Kingdom of Iceland, who was in personal union with Denmark, became an independent republic. One of the first foreign policy actions of the young state was the gap of the Danish-British agreement of 1901.

British soldiers in Reykjavik. May 1940.

If the Denmark "Fish Question" was even important, but not critical, for Iceland he turned out to be fundamental. This country depends on fisheries and related sectors of the economy as no other state in the world. Iceland has very few natural resources. There is no oil, gas, coal and even forests, and the agricultural potential of the country, which is 11% of the territory of which the glaciers occupy is extremely limited. Fish and products from it are the main article of Export of Iceland (from 1881 to 1976 - 89.71% of the total). In fact, the issue of saving fish stocks is a matter of survival of the country.

The first post-war conflict between the United Kingdom and Iceland began in 1952, when Iceland announced the expansion of forbidden for foreign fishermen of water from three to four miles. The British applied to the International Court of Justice, and so far there was a proceeding, banned Icelandic fishing vessels in their ports. This ban struck a serious blow to the Icelandic economy - the United Kingdom was the largest market for a small Northern country.

And here the descendants of the Viking reserved the newly started cold war. The excess cods with enthusiasm began to buy the Soviet Union, thereby expecting to increase its influence on albeit albeit, but one of the founding countries of NATO. A similar perspective was conquered by the United States, who also started purchasing large batches of Icelandic fish. As a result, the joint Soviet-American imports compensated for damage caused by British sanctions.

This conflict ended, as well as the three gravy wars, victory of Iceland that followed him. A country with a population of 160 thousand people won over the Great Power, one of the five states of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. In 1956, the United Kingdom had to recognize the Icelandic four-world zone to solve the organization of European economic cooperation (OECD predecessor).

First Crash War

Inspired by success, already in 1958, Icelanders decided to expand their exceptional fishing zone once again, and at once again up to 12 miles. But now it all began to be quite unsuccessful for them: all other members of NATO opposed such unilateral actions.
Unlike the "paper" conflict 1952-56, this time did not cost without the participation of the military: the United Kingdom sent a combat ships to the shores of Iceland. In total, 53 ship of the Royal Military Fleet, which was opposed to seven Icelandic patrol boats and one flying boat PBY Catalina was attended during the first crackle war in operation on the protection of the fishing fleet.
The presence of foreign naval forces in the coastal waters of Iceland caused protests in the country. The British Embassy gathered demonstrations of angry Icelanders, but Ambassador Andrew Gilcrist met their ridicule, including the full volume of the recruitment of the bagpipes and military marches on gramophone.

The Icelandic Patrol Boater Albert is suitable for the British trawler Coventry in Westfjord. 1958

Icelanders were explicitly losing position. Their attempts to delay British fishermen or expel them beyond the limits of the 12-mile zone stumbled on countering larger and powerful British warships. On September 4, when Icelandic patrol boat æGIR tried to expel the British trawler from Westfjord, the British Frigate Russell intervened, as a result of which both warships collided.
On November 12, the Thor's patrol boat tried to delay the Hackness trawler with the help of warning shots and tagged him, but the omnipresent Russell came to the rescue. The captain of the frigate demanded from Icelanders to leave the trawler alone, since he was outside the borders recognized by the British of the four-mile zone. Captain Boat Thor Eirikur Christoferson responded with refusal and began rapprochement with the trawler, ordered to keep one under the sight. The British promised to sink the Icelandic boat, if he once again heats. The conflict situation ended after the arrival of several more British ships, under the protection of which the trawler was retraced.
The number of similar episodes grew. Understanding that in confrontation with the British fleet, Iceland has no chance, the authorities of the country resorted to a banal blackmail. The Government of the Island state threatened to leave NATO and expel American troops from the country. Despite the overwhelming naval superiority, under the pressure of Americans, the United Kingdom was forced to recognize a 12-mile Icelandic exceptional economic zone. The only significant concession of Icelanders was the provision of the British rights to limited fishing in the external six miles from twelve.

The second crash war

Despite the victory obsessed in 1961, the situation with fish resources off the coast of Iceland continued to worsen. In the 1960s, herring, the catch of which fell from 8.5 million tons in 1958 was disappeared in the 1960s, the waters were disappeared in 1958. The length of the cod was also steadily declining, and according to the forecasts of biologists, she had to disappear after Salney for about 1980.
Iceland's attempts to attract the issue of international organizations with a crash failed. Proposals for the introduction of quotas for fishing and creating closed areas of districts, where the populations could restore their number, or ignored, or went on endless discussions into industry committees.

Cutter (in the foreground) used by Icelandic Coast Guard for damage to British fishing trawls. Behind him - a guy gun

In September 1972, the Government of Iceland for the preservation of fish stocks and increasing the share of the country in total ulov expanded the boundaries of the marine exclusive economic zone of the country to 50 miles. This time the coast guard tactics was different. Instead of detaining British trawlers or expel them, the Icelanders cut the cables of fishing trawls with special cutters.

At the foreign policy front, the situation for Icelanders was even worse than during the first war. Not only Western states, but also the countries of the Warsaw Agreement, were convicted of the unilateral expansion of the marine economic zone. The only Icelandic victory in this area was supported by African countries, which was obsessed with the demagogy of the Icelandic Premier: This NATO member state said that Icelandic actions are part of the wider struggle against imperialism and colonialism.

Icelandic boat VER (left) is trying to trim trawls of the British Northern Reward trawler (right), and the British tug of Statesman (in the center) is trying to prevent him

After the Icelanders crossed the network to eighteen fishing vessels, in May 1973, British Tolliers left the water to which Iceland claimed. However, they soon returned, this time defended by the frigates of the Royal Fleet. In June 1973, the Patrol Boat æGir during the exploration of the ice situation in Westfjord faced the scylla frigate. And on August 29 of the same year, the crew ægir suffered the first, and, unfortunately, the human sacrifice did not last for all three wars. During a collision with another British frigate from electric shock, an engineer was killed, which repaired the housing - its welding machine was poured with water.

Icelanders were again forced to get their joker from the sleeves. The government's government sounded the need to exit NATO, which should defend their members, and in practice there is no help. In September 1973, to save the situation in Reykjavik, the Secretary General of NATO Joseph Luns arrived. On October 3, the British warships were withdrawn, and on November 8, the parties to the conflict signed a temporary agreement. According to him, the fishing activity of the British inside the 50-mile zone was limited: their annual catch should not exceed 130,000 tons. The term of the agreement expired in 1975.

Iceland won again.

Third crackling war

Phased expansion of the economic marine zone of Iceland. Dark blue indicates a 200-mile band.

On November 16, 1975, a third cracking war began. Honestly waiting for the end of the term of the agreement of 1973, Icelanders decided not to be broken and declared their exceptional seaside now the 200-mile coastal strip is now. To counteract British trawlers, they were able to set six patrol boats and two trawlers of the Polish construction, armed and re-equipped in coast guard ships.

Collision of the Icelandic Patrol Boat Baldur (Right) and the British frigate Mermaid

The third crackling war lasted 7 months, until June 1976. It turned out to be the most tough of three - in its course there were 55 intentional clashes of ships of both countries. During this conflict, another person died, this time - the British fisherman, who killed the trawl cable cut off by the Icelandic boat. The farther incurred in the course of this war and on the diplomatic front - until the fact that on February 19, 1976, Iceland ruined diplomatic relations with the UK.

Clash of the Icelandic Patrol Boat Boat and the British Frigate of Scylla during the Third Cracked War on February 23, 1976

The outcome of the last grain war was predictable. Honestly exhausted all the possibilities of confrontation with the UK (not counting the open announcement of the war), Iceland re-applied its favorite "forbidden reception." Not the caustiously, Icelanders threatened to close the American base in Cablanca, which was the most important link in the defensive NATO system in North Atlantic.
On June 2, 1976, with the mediation of the same Secretary General of NATO, Joseph Luns, a new agreement was concluded, which set the point in Icelandic-British graves. According to him, during the next 6 months, 24 British trawler could be within the 200-mile marine exclusive zone of Iceland. After this period, the UK no longer had the right to catch fish inside the 200-mile zone without the permission of Iceland, thereby recognizing her new marine borders.

Cod wars ended in full and unconditional victory of Iceland. Of course, without the help of the USA, she was unlikely to endure in the fight against the UK. Nevertheless, an example of a small country, overcoming the Great Power, is indicative: Sometimes diplomacy may be stronger than the army or fleet.

And here Yury Gudimeno very originally decided to state this historical event:

I thought for a long time, as you can understand and sobfully talk about the Great (without quotes), the victory of tiny Iceland over the British Empire in the so-called "crackle war". And I did not come up with anything better than describing all 18 years old war. Pardon, but with Mat, without him (and here it is possible without him, because for children and those who smear the nose with the word b ... b I prepared an adapted version -V.M.)

So, gracious wars.

Characters:

The British Empire is a population of about 51 million people, a nuclear state.
Iceland - the population is about 300 thousand people, the army is absent.
NATO - the Alliance, in which Britain and Iceland consist.
Other countries - USSR, Germany, USA and others.

The act first. 1958

Iceland. I need a cod.

Other countries. You have 4 miles around yours, hmm, island, so catch yourself there.

Iceland. I need more cod.

(Iceland declares that now she owns all the seaside territory by 12 miles around the island)

Other countries (choir). Neither fuck yourself!

Iceland (gentle). Crack, cracker, my crash ...

Britannia. Listen to me...

Iceland (correlates). You.

Britannia. Hear you. I caught your fish, so I will catch. Hash is clear?

Iceland. Starting the eyes.

Britain (shocked): What?!

Iceland. Pro-inter-eye.

Britannia. I have a nuclear weapon.

Iceland. You will not fall into me.

Britannia. I have a fleet.

Iceland. Soon you will remember how nice it was about your fleet in the present time.

Britannia. You have less people than me sailors on a fleet!

Iceland. Nothing. Cod will be greasy in English meat.

Britannia. Oh you...

(British fishermen continue to catch a cod in the waters of Iceland)

Iceland (thoughtfully). Eye.

(Icelando Coast Guard surrounds the British ships and cuts them trawls)

Britain (chokering tea with milk). Yes, you ohrenel! ..

Britannia. I need a cod!

Iceland. Not. Cod needs Iceland and Soviet Union. Hey, union, do you want a little fish?

USSR (from afar). Fish? Union wants fish!

Britannia. Your mother ...

(Britain takes his fishermen and recognizes Iceland's right to a 12-mile zone)

Act second. 1972 year

Iceland. I need a cod.

Britannia. Again?!

Iceland. To me. Need. Cod.

(Iceland declares that now its exceptional rights extend to 50 miles around the island)

Other countries (choir). Yes, you ohrenel!

Iceland (correlates). You.

Britannia. You got me, petty pascut.

Germany. And me. I may need a crack too!

(Britain and Germany continue to fish in the waters of Iceland, putting frigates of the navy to their fishermen)

Iceland (thoughtfully). Starting the eyes. Each.

(Icelando coast guard is trying to trim trains from English fishermen, but runs on the warning fire of the military fleet)

Iceland (melancholy). I do not care - so others are sticking out ... (raises the phone) Hello, USA? Iceland worries. No, not Ireland, but Iceland. No, these are different countries. Starting the eyes. What? No, it is not for you. Do we have your military base here, remember? In the sense - "still stands"? Now we will remove, it is worth it. And then we are offended here, and from your database there is no sense. We will put another base, red. With a bear and a button. And Russians. What does it mean "not need"? A, "Decide the question"? Well, solve quickly. Chao. (hanging the phone)

THE USSR. Someone called me?

Iceland. No, you were heard.

THE USSR. Is there still cod?

Iceland. Not. She drowned.

THE USSR. Sorry.

USA. Hey, you are there, which in Icelandic waters!

Britain and Germany (chorus). What?

USA. Go from there the fuck, please.

Britannia. But cod ...

USA. From cod heartburn.

Britain (doomed). Your mother ...

(Britain and Germany leave Icelandic waters)

Iceland. As early as the next time.

Act third. 1975 year

Iceland. I need a cod.

Britain and Germany (looking back, quiet whisper). I went fucking.

Iceland. To me. Need. Cod.

(Iceland declares that she now belongs to water for 200 miles around the island)

Other countries. Iceland, yes you ... that is, you ...

Iceland (interrupts). As much as

Germany (melancholy). Opening.

Britannia. See and learn, sucking.

(Britain again introduces a military fleet to protect fishermen in Icelandic waters)

Iceland (thoughtfully). I have seven ships. Britain is about hundreds. (rubbing hands) it will be a great victory worthy of our ancestors of Vikings!

Germany (whisper). Iceland went the roof, call psychiatras.

Iceland. Remove coast guard!

(From the bay with difficulty, the old frigate "Thor" comes out, blows the road at once three english warships and comes into battle with them)

Other countries (choir). Iceland went the roof!

Iceland (with the devilish laughter). We are waiting for the draws of Valchallla, where we will be forever to drink with the forefather or a long table! ..

Other countries (whisper). Kapets.

(Icelandic and English ships chase each other by the sea, arranging shootouts)

USA. Yo Mama. You both...

Iceland (not listening). Fight English rats! Your place is in the gray niflheim, under the fifth Great Hel! Jollize the banner of the crow! With us Tor!

USA (in panic). You are both NATO members!

Iceland (without turning). Not anymore.

USA (falling into a chtonic horror). How not it?!

Iceland. We will not fight shoulder to shoulder with cowardly English rats. We leave NATO.

Other countries (choir). Ohnet! ..

USA (Palenaya). But you have the only NATO base in the northern seas!

USSR (sneaking). But from this place in more detail ...

USA. Your mother! Britannia! Can you two words?

Britain (reluctance). What else?!

USA. Fell from there!

Britannia. This is a question of principle!

USA. Starting her eyes!

Iceland. Ducklings, the USA, I didn't notice her first!

USA. Yes, you ohrenel!

Iceland (waving a cod). And you know, the bears are very loved by raw fish. Historical fact.

THE USSR. Ry-si-iba-aaaa ...

USA. Your mother! Britannia!

Britain (disappointed). Yes what for garbage ...

(Britain recalls her ships and after all countries of Europe recognizes Iceland's right to the 200-mile zone around the island)

Iceland (sad). The great one was left without sacrifice ... And the fun ended so quickly ... (looking around and noticing the volcano Eyyafyadlayukyudl) although you can still fix it!

All countries of the world (chorus). Your mother ...

Curtain

Cod wars Iceland. How unarmed Iceland Britain won in the war

Write a review about the article "Cod Wars"

Notes

Links

Excerpt characterizing gracious wars