Borderfire Report

Illegal Immigration News And Political Commentary

 
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
  • default color
  • green color
  • blue color

Dusting Off The UN Law Of The Sea Treaty

E-mail Print PDF

By Dana Gabriel
The United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is another one of those international agreements that the U.S. has yet to ratify.  President Reagan rejected the treaty, but a revised version was signed by President Clinton in 1994.  As a result of intense opposition, LOST was never brought before the Senate for a full vote.  Several failed attempts were also later made by the Bush administration to galvanize support for the treaty.  The Democrats are now laying the groundwork to finally ratify LOST.  Proponents view ratifying the treaty as an opportunity for the U.S. to further promote global security and stability.  Critics maintain that under LOST, the U.S. would be forced to surrender more sovereignty to the UN.

LOST is the legal framework by which all activities on, over, and under the world’s oceans are to be governed.  It would place 70% of the earth’s surface under UN control.  In a past article entitled 'LOST at Sea,' Congressman Ron Paul writes, “Under the Law of the Sea Treaty, an International Seabed Authority would control the minerals and other resources of the oceans’ seabed. After taking its own cut, this UN body would transfer whatever is left to select third-world governments and non-governmental organizations.”  Many argue that if the U.S. does not ratify LOST, they might lose out on the mad dash for Arctic resources.  Critics contend that under the treaty, the U.S. would be forced to obtain UN permission before conducting ocean development, which would make any new activities that much more difficult and costly.
 
The International Seabed Authority would have the power to set production control for ocean mining, drilling and fishing.  They would also regulate ocean exploration, issue permits, charge fees and settle disputes within its own court system.  Under LOST, an international tribunal has been established made up of a panel of 21 UN judges who have the power to enforce treaty provisions and rulings.  Ratifying LOST would further place U.S. interests at the mercy of international courts whose decisions could override domestic laws.
 
In the same article on LOST, Ron Paul also states that, “The Law of the Sea Treaty also would give the UN power to tax American citizens and businesses, which has been a long-time dream of the anti-sovereignty globalists.”  LOST is closely integrated with other treaties, such as the Convention on Climate Change and it could be used as a backdoor for global taxation.  Ratifying LOST could facilitate the ability of environmental organizations to sue the U.S., using international courts.  Under the guise of protecting the environment, the UN is gaining more control over individuals and nation-states alike.
 
A recent incident in the South China Sea between a U.S. military intelligence ship and several Chinese vessels, has prompted accusations from both sides.  The Americans insist that the Chinese were harassing the U.S. ship and were in violation of international law.  In turn, China condemned U.S. actions as being illegal and in violation of LOST, as well other laws and regulations.  China has ratified LOST and it appears as if their interpretation of the treaty is being used as a means to try and ban all foreign military ships from operating inside its 200 mile exclusive economic zone.  The U.S. ratifying LOST would not prevent any such future incidents, but rather could serve to limit its military intelligence operations.  LOST could severely compromise America’s ability to move freely on the high seas.
 
The United Nations cannot be trusted in protecting American interests.  Under LOST, the U.S. would only have one vote, unlike the UN Security Council where it enjoys veto power.  UN bureaucracy has proven to be a breeding ground for corruption.  It would be unwise to hand over any control of the oceans, oil, gas and minerals to the UN.  The last thing the U.S. needs to do is surrender more sovereignty.

Dana Gabriel writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, and other issues.
Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Dana Gabriel Archives


Trackback(0)
Comments (0)Add Comment

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
Disclaimer:  This website has no responsibility for the views, opinions and information communicated here.The contributors and news providers are fully responsible for their content. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Borderfire Report.

Other Resources News Headlines

Banished! City forbids Bible studies in homes Banished! City forbids Bible studies in homes

The city of Gilbert, Ariz., has ordered a group of seven adults to stop gathering for Bible studies in a private home because such meetings are forbidden by the city's zoning codes.
Bob Unruh / WorldNetDaily - Full Story


 
Concerns in Bloody Border Battle Concerns in Bloody Border Battle

Homeland Security: Mexican drug cartels infiltrating U.S. Border Patrol..
Fox News - Video


 
Mexican Military Incursion In Texas Mexican Military Incursion In Texas

These sorts of invasions by Mexico’s corrupt military, long on the drug cartel payroll, have been going on for years but the timing of this incursion is especially alarming since it occurred on the same week that Homeland Security officials revealed Mexican drug cartels are rapidly infiltrating fede...

 
County Spends 600 Million On Welfare For Illegal Aliens County Spends 600 Million On Welfare For Illegal Aliens

For the second consecutive year taxpayers in a single U.S. county will dish out more than half a billion dollars just to cover the welfare and food-stamp costs of illegal immigrants.
Corruption Chronicles - Full Story


 
Bill requires U.S. withdrawal from NAFTA Bill requires U.S. withdrawal from NAFTA

A coalition of 27 lawmakers from across the political spectrum is sponsoring a bill to withdraw the U.S. from the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, in as little as six months.
Chelsea Schilling / WorldNetDaily - Full Story


 
Why Did Obama Administration Drop Immigration Charges Against Agriprocessors’ Rubashkin? Why Did Obama Administration Drop Immigration Charges Against Agriprocessors’ Rubashkin?

The Obama Administration’s excuse was that it had convicted Rubashkin  on other charges, relating to his financial rather than immigration crimes...
James Fulford / VDARE - Full Story


 
change