This article consists of 7 pages and 2073 words.
To get full access to this article, email us at Sales@thedocumentco.com.
Title: What forces, or rather who stops a fishy-war from turning into the real thing, and what factors might escalate things out of control?
The term “Fishy-War” has been extensively used for disagreements given rise by disputed territorial limits and fishing rights. These were the tensions fueled by conflicts between two entities leading to the struggle of overpowering one another to get economic benefits and to get a higher position in the political hierarchy. This struggle to gain political supremacy and more fishing stocks can be led by a number of factors including economic exploitation, integration of one entity into another one, hyper-nationalism etc. This even leads to economic and political destruction and even causalities to both parties when an entity is too blinded in the pursuit of gaining power and a sense of superiority over other entity that it even ends up using hard power. (Mitchell, B., 1976)
Then come various mediating forces, who try to stop these disputes from becoming wars. These entities enable the members of these organizations, which are various countries of the world, to solve their political and economic issues and also to provide military services if diplomacy does not work. (Svensson, I. and Lindgren, M., 2013) In history, Iceland has tried to manage its fish stocks despite extreme political pressure from a stronger and more coercive group, the trawlermen. This can be studied as an example to learn about challenges raised by the intervention. (Gissurarson, H.H., 1983) Cod wars resulted in tensions between Britain and Iceland to gain “power” and “natural resources”. The 1970s Cod wars led to economic disputes over control and rights to gain natural resources and distribution of such resources such as fishes. (Ingimundarson, 2003 p. 88)
It is true when one nation becomes greedy for power and economic expansion and wants to maximize its profits it starts exploiting other nations. High demand for natural resources and raw materials is mostly led by mass consumerism and capitalism thereby, giving rise to competition on a global level. (Le Billon, P., 2013) So was the case of Britain when it started fishing in Icelandic waters. In order to trace the hidden and underlying origin of “Cod War”, we will find that it was in the nineteenth century, as Britain became the undisputed master of high seas and British supremacy was supported even more so by the narrow three-mile limit of the fishing territorial waters. Britain even sent its Royal Navy to the disputed waters yet it faced defeat mainly because Britain took too long to recognize the changes in distribution and composition of power after World War II. (Jóhannesson, no date, p. 545)
When Britain started fishing in the Icelandic waters and British fish industry flourished as it used high-class boats, the Icelandic locals felt a great resentment as Iceland’s economy was heavily dependent on its fishery, and as a result of which they started arresting British trawler-men and ruined their boats. The British Government had to protect its Fishing industry so it sent a naval army to protect these trawlers industry. Even though its economy wasn’t heavily dependent on fishing as did Iceland’s. Fishing accounted for 80% of Iceland’s exports while for Britain it was merely 1% but Britain made numerous efforts to protect its fish industry. Even though Fishing, however, did account for 1% of British gross national product, the industry was of great importance to Mighty Britain as two of the largest fishing ports in the world named Hull and Grimsy belonged to this very nation. (Johannesson, 2004 p. 44) Britain made use of “Gunboat diplomacy”, which is basically the use of power and force to enforce their laws and maintain their supremacy. Here one can argue that the use of force can be one of the factors which will stop tensions as one party will overpower the other one, but this can backfire and result into bigger disputes which it did in the Anglo-Icelandic disputes, and as a result, the Icelandic government opposed and fought back. Gunboat diplomacy was when the Naval forces took part actively in the disputes to signal coercion and this diplomacy was somewhat successful. (Jóhannesson, no date, p. 545)
Another factor can be when the laws of the sea and rights are not rigid and implemented in a proper manner. Constantly developing laws can create ambiguity and confusion between the two parties at dispute. This factor can be seen in the great Cod war between British and Iceland as well. Initially, the limits were 3 miles, but soon it was realized that 3 miles is not wide enough and fishing limits were forcefully widened, tensions also grew as a result. Cod wars can be seen in the context of western integration. When the local government of Iceland came into power it altered fishing laws and territorial limits which were already a basis of confusion as they were constantly at a flux. In 1971 a left-wing Government was formed in Iceland, and it made changes in the fishery limits as it expanded them unilaterally from twelve to fifty miles. Moreover, it revised the Defense Agreement with the United States, as it aimed to expel US troops from entering Iceland…
Recent Comments