Abstract
Canada's unilateral extension of its jurisdiction over high seas fisheries in the Northwest Atlantic led in 1995 to a serious confrontation with Spain and the European Union. Although the dispute was ultimately resolved through negotiation, it raised important questions about the appropriateness and limitations of unilateral state action to protect resource and related environmental interests. This article examines the "turbot war" between Canada and Spain by analyzing the language of the disputants and outside observers to place the Canadian action in a broader normative perspective. Without trying to judge the lawfulness of the Canadian extension, it nonetheless suggests that both the conditions under which the Canadians acted and the response of the international community to the Canadian initiative provide support for a limited state right to take unilateral steps to respond to serious threats to important resources.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
