I've been an opponent of the Law of the Sea Treaty since circa 1976. I think the sovereignity give-away feature is a Bad Thing. But it's good to hear both sides, and Via Meadia offers some points in favor of the other side:
This treaty has been kicking around unratified for nearly twenty years, and it appears that the opposition is holding fast. Many senators, particularly Republicans, have raised concerns that ratification of the treaty could result in a loss of sovereignty, forcing America to give up part of its taxing authority to the United Nations.
The arguments in favor of ratification are getting stronger, however. One in particular is becoming more powerful: The treaty is an important legal bulwark in the struggle over the South China Sea. China has ratified the treaty, and under its provisions many of China’s extreme territorial claims do not stand up. These violations give the U.S. and its allies more leverage in potential territorial clashes with China, but it will be hard for the U.S. to muster an international consensus in favor of enforcing a treaty that we haven’t ratified.
I'm probably still against it, but things have changed since 1978.
Posts
