Posted on 09/03/2007 9:56:19 AM PDT by processing please hold
Unclos gives countries the right to exploit the Arctic seabed up to 200 nautical miles offshore.
The international battle for Arctic territory may look like a Wild West brawl but the real fight for supremacy is more likely to revolve around legal arguments and seismic data than showdowns between ice-breakers or submarines.
As Canada unveils plans for a military base and Russia drops a titanium flag on the seabed, lawyers say the real centre of action is an obscure United Nations-hosted body known as the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.
The commission is the global authority that will determine how much territory the big five Arctic seabed claimants - Canada, Russia, the US, Denmark and Norway - will be able to bag for oil exploration and other uses.
Robert Volterra, a partner at Latham & Watkins, the law firm, says cases pleaded by states at the commission over the coming years are likely to have more impact on the Arctic's future than "symbolic" flag-planting intended for Russian domestic political consumption. "There is a consistent body of public international law," Mr Volterra says. "It's not like the age of discovery, where the European voyager went out and said: 'I claim this land on behalf of the Queen of England or the King of Spain.'"
Lawyers and scientists say Russia's latest Arctic mission was most significant for the opportunity it provided to gather more geological and geophysical data to support its quest to extend its territorial rights. Russia and Norway have lodged claims for territorial extensions with the continental shelf commission; marine lawyers expect Canada and Denmark to follow suit.
The commission, which is made up of scientists and legal experts, is responsible for implementing the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), the key international agreement in this area. Unclos gives countries the right to exploit the seabed up to 200 nautical miles offshore, with the option of an extension if they can prove to the commission that the continental shelves emanating from their coasts go farther still out to sea. States must make these claims for extra miles within 10 years of applying the treaty, which means Canada has until 2013 and Denmark until 2014 to launch a case.
The complication with Unclos is Washington's reluctance - not for the first time - to submit to UN authority by ratifying a treaty approved by much of the rest of the world. Lawyers say this creates a dilemma for the US. While it retains autonomy by staying out of the treaty, this potentially limits its seabed claims to the 200-mile limit allowed it under customary international law.
Politicians in Washington have stepped up a campaign to persuade the US Congress to embrace Unclos and so ensure that Washington has a say in the adjudication of Arctic disputes.
President George W. Bush has called on the Senate to ratify the treaty to "secure US sovereign rights over extensive marine areas, including the valuable natural resources they contain", as well as giving Washington formal negotiating rights.
President George W. Bush has called on the Senate to ratify the treaty to "secure US sovereign rights over extensive marine areas, including the valuable natural resources they contain", as well as giving Washington formal negotiating rights.
Negotiating rights?
There’s no sovereignty in submitting to a global government.
Exactly!
A secured and controlled border is a pipe dream, it'll never happen.
Just peeling the onion.
Take a peek at my home page when you have some time and see just how much our government gives to this corrupt organization.
Why are we turning a fox in the loose in the hen house?
Come on now, get with the program. What are you a believer in national sovereignty? /sac
bttt
We’re gonna lose this country to the un if we ain’t very careful and diligent.
I have hope that there are enough folks still awake to reverse the progress the socialists are making.
Impossible to submit to a nonexistent. Even the 'treaty' is not a Treaty. Unlike the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty, which also has nothing to do with the nonexistent UN authority.
There are plenty. They're simply dozing for now but they'll be roused soon enough.
Get back to me when that non-treaty is voted on. Maybe you should tell Bush there's no such thing and he'll stop pushing it.
If this this administration gets its way-yes.
He luvs this kind of thing even if it’s not a treaty exactly. International trade is the game. The 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty we know about and so does he, but he is in no hurry to do something about that either, and that is his Prime Maxim: There is no hurry to do something.
This may come as a surprise to you but have you ever heard of Executive Order 13366?
No
When you have some time, you probably should have a look at it.
Since it is an EO and I am not in the FedGov Exec Branch it has nothing to do with me. How about an Exec summary since I am wasting valuable Retirement time getting sidetracked on nothingness.
I'm not your private secretary, do it yourself. You're retired.
If your not willing to do the leg work yourself, have you ever considered staying off these threads if you don't have the time to put forth an engaging argument. You're always on these trying to twist and turn everything on them.
Are you a retired un worker?
Take an interest in the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.