Call your representative today and protect your familes rights: 202-224-3121 In current days, leading US cabinet officers have traveled around the globe on high profile diplomatic missions Ironically, in the process of Secretary of State Hillary Clintons go to towards the Arctic Circle and Secretary of Protection Leon Panettas travels in Asia, they each undercut the case for the U N controversial Regulation in the Sea Treaty Dropped a situation they had jointly produced before departing in testimony before the Senate Overseas Relations Committee
Mrs Clinton took component in a meeting from the Arctic Council, whose 8 members have territory in that region Of those, just five Russia, Canada, Norway, Denmarks Greenland and the United states actually have coasts around the Arctic Ocean, and therefore can claim rights to the sources offshore
Ocean Initiative To become certain, the secretary of State used the event of her becoming a member of another Arctic nations for that objective of forging a new region wide search and rescue SandR agreement to express the Obama administrations commitment to Dropped She assured her colleagues that the president is determined to overcome opposition within the Senate and the country in order to get the treaty ratified
Nonetheless, this SandR agreement suggests the most obvious: It is far easier to achieve understandings in a group of 8 or, even better, 5 nations that have similar, if not identical, interests and a shared understanding of the stakes, than among a group of 150 plus nations, most of whom do not
If that is true for an accord governing be an aid to downed planes and ships Lost at sea, it surely is the case when it comes towards the disposition of potentially many trillions of dollars worth of undersea oil and gas deposits
Meanwhile, our Protection secretary was off in Asia trying to shore up Americas alliances within the region without really saying that China is a threat that needs to be countered there So he eschewed the presidents much touted strategic pivot through the Middle East and South Asia towards the South China Sea supposedly involving a move in force to parry the PRCs aspirations for hegemony
Instead, Mr Panetta employed less offensive terms like rebalancing and made commitments about a future US presence within the theater that have been deeply discounted considering ongoing, and approaching, sharp cuts in defense spending
It happens that Secretary Panettas enthusiasm for that Law of the Sea Treaty tracks with Team Obamas public efforts to low ball the dangers caused from Chinas increasingly aggressive behavior toward our Asian friends and allies, and its growing capability to act coercively due to its growing military capabilities
Panetta and, surprisingly, even senior Navy and other military officers who should know better seem to think that if only the united states were a party to Dropped, international law would tame the Chinese dragon
As one of the nations most astute China hands, Gordon Chang, noted recently in his column at Globe Affairs Journal: Although Beijing ratified the [LOST] pact in June 1996, it continues to issue maps claiming the entire South China Sea That declare is, among other things, incompatible together with the treatys rules Its no wonder Beijing notified the UN
conservativeactionalerts.com in 2006 that it would not accept international arbitration of its sovereignty claims
Just as common sense argues for using bilateral or, at most, five party forums to establish arrangements governing the Arctic Oceans resources, it strongly militates against the united states allowing itself to become bound to a treaty whose core provisions ie, these governing limitations on territorial claims and mandatory dispute resolutions are already being serially violated by Communist China
On May 9, Secretary Panetta nonetheless asserted that By moving from the sidelines, by sitting at the table of nations that have acceded to this treaty, we can defend our interests, we can lead the discussions, we will be in a position to influence those treaty bodies that develop and interpret the Law of the Sea
That is not really so if, as is true of the LOSTs various institutions, we would have but one seat among many, and no certainty that we can decisively influence bodies that develop and interpret the Law of the sea
Ocean Initiative In fact, thanks to the rigged game nature of these institutions, such bodies can be relied upon to hamstring us by, for example, applying environmental regulations over which we have no control to our Navys anti submarine warfare exercises and our domestic emissions into inland air and water that migrates towards the international oceans
Meanwhile, china will get away with selecting which rules they may abide by and which they wont
Mr Chang puts it this way: China is a signatory towards the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but remains a notorious nuclear proliferator, and it is a member of the Globe Trade Organization, yet brazenly disregards its trade obligations And UN sanctions? China openly violates these too, even though it is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council
In short, the Obama Administration wants senators to suspend common sense and ignore real and legitimate concerns about the deleterious impact of the Law of the Sea Treaty on our sovereignty, economic interests and potentially even the national security Will 34 Senators have enough common sense to just say No?
