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.