Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Current press articles and periodical literature, both in the United States and abroad, are manifesting a developing interest in trans-polar aviation and Arctic aërial jurisdiction. Although this interest in Arctic airspace appears to be conceived in the exigencies of the present world conflict, belief in the practicability of air routes traversing the Arctic Basin and joining the great centers of civilization of the two hemispheres was expressed as long ago as shortly after the First World War. Perhaps most vocal of the exponents is the polar explorer and publicist Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who began to stress the positional significance of the Arctic almost twenty years ago.
Meanwhile the feasibility of polar aviation was demonstrated in actual practice. Following a series of experimental flights by dirigible and plane—and once the urge to attain the North Pole via the air materialized in the successful flights of Richard E. Byrd, Roald Amundsen-Lincoln Ellsworth, and Umberto Nobile in 1926 and 1928—polar flying concentrated largely upon the spanning of the Atlantic and Pacific aërial highways between the two hemispheres.
1 The Adventure of Wrangel Island (N. Y., 1925), passim, and “The Resources of the Arctic and the Problem of Their Utilization,” in Joerg, W. L. G. (ed.), Problems of Polar Research (N. Y., American Geographical Society, 1928).Google Scholar
2 For good summaries of the development of polar flying, see Joerg, , Problems of Polar Research, and Brief History of Polar Exploration Since the Introduction of Flying (N. Y., American Geographical Society, 1930)Google Scholar; and Hayes, J. Gordon, The Conquest of the North Pole: Recent Arctic Exploration (N. Y., 1934).Google Scholar
3 This polar projection is briefly explained and graphically illustrated in “Maps—Global War Teaches Global Cartography,” Life, Aug. 3, 1942, pp. 67–65, and is utilized in the preparation of several current maps, such as the Insert in Fortune (Mar., 1942) and the wall chart Polar Aëronautical World, ed. by Trewartha, Glenn T. and published by A. J. Nystrom and Co. (1942).Google Scholar
4 Colegrove, Kenneth W., International Control of Aviation (Boston, 1930), p. 40.Google Scholar
5 Zollmann, Carl, Law of the Air (Milwaukee, 1927), p. 1.Google Scholar
6 Baldwin, Simeon E., “The Law of the Airship,” Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law, Vol. 4, p. 95 (1910).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Hershey, Amos S., The Essentials of International Public Law and Organization (N. Y., 1930), pp. 340, 341Google Scholar; Wilson, George Grafton, Handbook of International Law (St. Paul, 1927), p. 77.Google Scholar
8 Colegrove, op. cit., pp. 5, 6.
9 A host of pre-war conferences are listed in Tombs, Laurence C., International Organization in European Air Transport (N. Y., 1936), p. 4, n. 4Google Scholar; for an account of the work and achievements of these conferences, see Colegrove, op. cit., Chap. 3.
10 Scott, James Brown, Resolutions of the Institute of International Law (N. Y., 1916), p. 164.Google Scholar
11 Hall, William E., A Treatise on International Law (Oxford, 1924), p. 205.Google Scholar
12 Fenwick, Charles G., International Law (N. Y., 1924), pp. 287, 288.Google Scholar
13 A study of this legislation—including the laws of Austria (1912), France (1911, 1913), Great Britain (1911, 1913), Italy (1914), Prussia (1910)—indicates that the doctrine of freedom of the air has attained little headway with the governments, all of which made the most unequivocal claim to absolute jurisdiction over the airspace above their territory. Colegrove, op. cit., p. 46.
14 Fenwick, op. cit., p. 288; also see Naval War College, “Jurisdiction and Polar Areas,” International Law Situations, 1937 (Wash., D. C., 1939), Situation 3, p. 125.Google Scholar
15 Tombs, op. cit., p. 8.
16 For the text of the 1919 Convention, see Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law, supp., Vol. 17, pp. 195–215 (1923).
17 Arts. 1, 2, 15, 21, 32.
18 Hudson, Manley O., “Aviation and International Law,” Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law, Vol. 24, p. 231 (1930).Google Scholar
19 Hudson, Manley O., International Legislation, III, 2019.Google Scholar
20 Ibid., IV, 2356.
21 Codification of American International Law (Wash., D. C., 1925), project no. 20, pp. 68–76; Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law, supp., Vol. 20, pp. 340–347 (1926).
22 Art. 2; Amer. Jour. of Internal. Law, supp. Vol. 24, pp. 184, 239 (1930).
23 Hudson, “Aviation and International Law,” loc. cit., p. 236. For a list of these treaties to 1930, see Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law., supp., Vol. 24, pp. 161–168 (1930); and for a critical discussion of the subject (see Tombs, op. cit., Chap. 5), which includes a list of bilateral agreements to 1935, pp. 101, 102.
24 44 U. S. Statutes at Large 568 ff., especially sec. 6, p. 572.
25 Hudson, Manley O., Cases and Other Materials on International Law (St. Paul, 1936), p. 392.Google Scholar
26 Tombs, op. cit., p. 52.
27 Garner, James W., Recent Developments in International Law (Calcutta, 1925), p. 145.Google Scholar
28 Taracouzio, T. A., The Soviet Union and International Law (N. Y., 1935), p. 71.Google Scholar
29 Garner, op. cit., p. 145.
30 Ibid.
31 Taracouzio, , The Soviet Union and International Law, p. 71.Google Scholar
32 Zollmann, op. cit., p. 2.
33 Garner, op. cit., p. 146.
34 “The Law of the Airship,” loc. cit., p. 96.
35 Op. cit., p. 288.
36 Op. cit., pp. 340, 341.
37 “Aviation and International Law,” loc. cit., pp. 238–240.
38 International Law (Boston, 1922), I, pp. 326 ff.
39 International Law (N. Y., 1931), p. 58.
40 Op. cit., pp. 117, 119.
41 Op. cit., p. 3.
42 Op. cit., p. 146.
43 Jurisdiction of a littoral state over the airspace superjacent to its maritime waters was acknowledged at the 1930 Hague codification conference; see “Hague Codification of International Law: II. Territorial Waters,” Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law, supp., Vol. 24, p. 240, art. 2 (1930).
44 Naval War College, op. cit., p. 127.
45 Hudson, “Aviation and International Law,” loc. cit., p. 238.
46 Tombs, op. cit., p. 53.
47 Lee, Blewett, “Freedom of the Air in the United States,” Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law, Vol. 25, p. 247 (1931).Google Scholar
48 Hudson, “Aviation and International Law,” loc. cit., pp. 238, 239.
49 Air Commerce Act of 1926, sec. 6(c), 44 U. S. Statutes at Large, 572.
50 Tombs, op. cit., pp. 102, 103.
51 Edouard d'Hooghe, formerly president of the International Juridical Committee of Aviation, Droit Aérien (Paris, 1912)Google Scholar, is one of the few writers who are cognizant of this status; cited in Spaight, J. M., Aircraft in War (London, 1914), p. 140.Google Scholar
52 Hyde, Charles Cheney “Acquisition of Sovereignty Over Polar Areas,” Iowa Law Review, Vol. 19, pp. 289–292 (1934)Google Scholar; Naval War College, op. cit., p. 116; Smedal, Gustav, Acquisition of Sovereignty Over Polar Areas (Oslo, 1931), p. 54Google Scholar; Lakhtine, Vladimir Leont'evich, Prava na Severny Poliarny Prostranstva (Moscow, 1928), pp. 37, 38Google Scholar, as cited in Taracouzio, T. A., Soviets in the Arctic (N. Y., 1938), p. 321.Google ScholarLakhtine's, study was rewritten in English under the title “Rights Over the Arctic,” Amer. Jour. of Internat. Law, Vol. 24, pp. 703–717 (1930).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53 Dominion of Canada, Senate Debates (1906–1907), p. 271. Although sectorism was subsequently relied upon by a number of Dominion officials, the Government of Canada has never based the legality of its pretensions to polar territory upon it, and neither the Canadian Parliament nor the Foreign Office has yet declared or implied its adherence to the principle.
54 “Political Rights in the Arctic,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 4, pp. 47–60 (Oct., 1925). This study was combined with another on “National Rights in the Antarctic,” Foreign Affairs (Apr., 1927), Vol. 5, pp. 508–510, and was then published as “Political Rights in the Polar Regions,” in Joerg, , Problems of Polar Research, pp. 235–250.Google Scholar
55 “Problema vozdushnoi okkupatsii v sviazi s pravom na poliarnye prostranstva” (Problems of Aërial Occupation in Connection with Rights in the Arctic), Voprosy Vozdushnogo Prava, 1: 104 ff.Google Scholar; “S. S. S. R. i Poliarnye Zemli” (The U. S. S. R. and the Land in the Arctic), Soveiskoe Pravo (1926) 3: 43 ff.Google Scholar; and “S. S. S. R. i Severnyi Polius” (The U. S. S. R. and the North Pole), Sovetskoe Pravo, Vol. 3, no. 3 (1929).Google Scholar
56 “Die territoriale Sektoreneinteilung der Arktis im Zusammenhang mit dem zuerwartenden transarktischen Luftverkehr,” Petermanns Mitteilungen (1928) 74: 23–28; translated by Anderson, M. B. A. and Anderson, R. M. as “Territorial Division of the Arctic,” Dalhousie Review, Vol. 8, pp. 456–470 (Jan., 1929).Google Scholar
57 Lakhtine presented his idea at greater length in Prava na Severnye Poliarnye Prostranstva, and in a summarized form in “Rights Over the Arctic,” loc. cit.
58 “Sovetskoe Pravo v Poliarnykh Prostranstvakh” (Soviet Law in the Arctic), Rabochii Sud (1928), p. 984 ff.Google Scholar
59 “Die Arktis,” in Klute, Fritz (ed.), Handbuch der Geographischen Wissenschaft (Potsdam, 1933), Chap. 8, pp. 496–543.Google Scholar
60 “Sovereignty in the Arctic,” Research Bulletin on the Soviet Union (Aug. 30, 1937), II, no. 8, pp. 81–83.
61 “Canada's New Front Door,” Canadian Magazine, Vol. 89, p. 9 (Mar., 1938).
62 British and Foreign State Papers (1926) 124: 1064, 1065; translating text from Izvestia, Apr. 16, 1926.
63 Quoted in Taracouzio, , The Soviet Union and International Law, pp. 73–75.Google Scholar
64 Ibid., p. 76.
65 Lakhtine, “Rights Over the Arctic,” loc. cit., pp. 714, 715.
66 “Problema vozdushnoi okkupatsii v sviazi s pravom na poliarnye prostranstva,” loc. cit., cited in Taracouzio, Soviets in the Arctic, p. 361.
67 Ibid., p. 362.
68 Ibid.
69 Ibid., p. 364.
70 As a matter of fact, with the exception of the Soviet decree of 1926, it has not even been recognized in the municipal law of the Arctic states.
71 Taracouzio, Soviets in the Arctic, pp. 364, 365.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.