Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

United Nations Jurisdiction Of The Seas ? - The Law Of The Seas Treaty
Red State ^ | Ken Taylor

Posted on 09/16/2007 11:40:42 AM PDT by processing please hold

A move by the Bush administration in May of this year which fell under the radar is soon to come to the Senate. On September 27th the Senate will debate and vote on the full ratification of the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Seas or in short The Law of the Seas Treaty. The treaty in essence gives the United Nation legal jurisdiction over the planets ocean and sets up a tribunal to govern all legal claims to territorial waters, mineral rights and mining and other uses of the worlds oceans, including navigation.

The treaty which has been in existence since the first Conference dating from 1973 - 1982 has never been ratified by The United States. When first presented in 1983 President Ronald Reagan categorically refused to even sign the treaty because he felt that it impugned on United States sovereignty.

Certain portions of the treaty have been beneficial and the United States abides by these terms as a matter of international law. For instance the treaty sets basic territorial waters and prevents nations who wish to push these territorial limits from over extending the recognized waters around their shore line borders. In other words in accordance to treaty limitations a nation cannot stretch its sovereign waters to a limit of say 250 miles and expect all other nations to abide by those unreasonable limits. Yet even with the treaty some countries have over extended their territorial waters without consequence. China and North Korea are among those.

The main contention that The United States has had to the treaty is Part XI which gives the UN full legal control in all mineral rights on every seabed found on the earths oceans. Without treaty ratification if a nation finds, for instance an mineral deposit in international waters and wishes to mine it then they are free to do so. Also ratification of the treaty would place United States fishing interest under the jurisdiction of the UN. U.S. fisheries would have fishing limits set by UN control and if those limits were exceeded they would be required to turn surplus catch over to distribution by the UN.

The Treaty would also require the United States to plead any case which questions the treaty before a non - elected United Nations Tribunal which then would decide in favor or against the United States. In light of the way every UN vote is conducted in recent years and the way that the United States is treated by that vote, this tribunal would be a disaster for U.S. interests. The UN after all loves U.S. money but hates U.S. interests.

In May the Bush Administration at the behest of career diplomats in the State Department urged the United States Senate to ratify all provision of the Treaty and the vote for this ratification begins on September 27th. In the past either a Republican President like Reagan or a Republican Majority in the Senate has blocked any ratification of the treaty. Now with a Democrat Majority who favors all UN control provides a distinct possibility of fully ratifying this treaty.

The dangers for the U.S. in this ratification are as follows:

1. The U.S. would be answerable to a UN unelected tribunal for all matters which involve the Seas and ocean borders of our nation.

2. Other countries environmental regulations could be forced on the United States through the UN and our surrounding waters by international law and mandate. The harvest of our fishing waters would also fall under UN mandate which will set limits and require fishing only in certain areas and relinquishing the surplus harvest to UN distribution. The requirement would also mandate over fishing in these particular areas.

3. The treaty would mandate recognized navigation rights. This provision is not only not necessary but not wanted by US interests because these UN mandated navigational lanes are not threatened by any international law and there is not a nation who has the capability of dictating to the US where we may travel, including the Navy in the world oceans.

4. The treaty gives a blank check to the UN on the spending of money supplied by the U.S. without ANY U.S. oversight.

5. The treaty gives eminent domain rights to the UN over intellectual property. In other words the UN would have the power to seize technology.

This treaty, if ratified, would allow the United Nations a free hand over all of the worlds oceans and any mineral actions taken in the oceans would not only come under UN jurisdiction, but would be taxable to the UN without ANY outside oversight on the spending of the monies acquired. All navigational lanes would be set by UN mandate and any country traveling outside of those mandated navigational lanes, including Navy's would be subject to action by the unelected UN tribunal.

This treaty, if ratified, would transfer wealth and technology by UN mandate from industrialized nations to third world countries. In other words a world wide socialized redistribution of wealth forcing the financial equality of all nations. This treaty would create a huge United Nations bureaucracy with legal jurisdiction over the worlds oceans. The UN has failed in the past in every instance where they have been allowed to run, oversee or control any program. Remember the Iraq Oil For Food Program. Now the US Senate is poised to ratify a treaty that dwarfs the Oil for Food Program both in scope and jurisdiction.

Since the treaty was written the opposition by the U.S. has caused many nations to not sign on to the treaty. The first Bush administration and the the Clinton administration proposed provisions that supposedly corrected the flaws and the Clinton signed the treaty in 1994 which caused some Nations to follow suit and others to ratify. The GOP controlled Senate stopped ratification and many nations who had signed the treaty have not ratified in accordance to the U.S. lead.

Now the present Bush administration is backing full ratification and a Democrat Senate who back the UN and adhere to socialist policies could very likely ratify the treaty. There are 34 no votes needed to prevent ratification. Call, write or e-mail you Senator and urge them to vote against ratification. Time is short. September 27th is just around the corner. This treaty will place vital United States interests under UN control and threatens our sovereignty as a nation which cannot be allowed.

We stopped the Senate Amnesty Bill and with a similar concentrated effort by the people we can prevent the ratification of the Law of the Seas Treaty and save American sovereignty and interests.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: freedom; lawoftheseatreaty; liberty; lost; nationalsovereignty; newworldodor; newworldorder; oneworldgovernment; owg; un; unclos; unitednations; unitedstates; us; usa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-224 next last
I sure as heck hope FReepers are calling their senators on this.

I would think our sovereignty is as important to them as Anna Nicole Smith is.

1 posted on 09/16/2007 11:40:45 AM PDT by processing please hold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

Bush just keeps bringing this up every few months for another vote. Trying to slip in another majority citizen unpopular UN-US sovergnity give away.

Call congress now! Say NO again!


2 posted on 09/16/2007 11:43:56 AM PDT by o_zarkman44 (No Bull in 08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

Absolutely. This turd needs to be flushed.


3 posted on 09/16/2007 11:45:35 AM PDT by pissant (Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: o_zarkman44
He will not let go of pushing this.

Lord help our country if we have to depend on the un for disputes we have.

1. The U.S. would be answerable to a UN unelected tribunal for all matters which involve the Seas and ocean borders of our nation.

4 posted on 09/16/2007 11:48:16 AM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Absolutely. This turd needs to be flushed.

Once and for all.

5 posted on 09/16/2007 11:49:24 AM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
This might interest you.

The 62nd session of the UN General Assembly will start on September 18. The leaders of 192 states will make speeches from September 25. Russia will be represented by the Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. - RIA Novosti

Russia calls on UN to keep space weapon free

6 posted on 09/16/2007 12:00:30 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

Is Bush the Anti-Christ or was the left always right about him being dumber than a box of rocks?? What kind of idiot can see this as a positive thing after seeing how the UN dispises the US? I can just see how tariffs and permissions leavied against the navy for sea use. What an idiot! Trusting the UN with anything is like asking a child molester to babysit!


7 posted on 09/16/2007 12:00:45 PM PDT by Bommer (“He that controls the spice controls the universe!” (unfortunately that spice is Nutmeg!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

8 posted on 09/16/2007 12:06:07 PM PDT by RightWhale (Snow above 2000')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
How much damage will he do to us before the next election worries me to no end.

Trusting the UN with anything is like asking a child molester to babysit!

Excellent way to put it.

9 posted on 09/16/2007 12:07:16 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

The UN is the worlds toilet bowl. Time to flush it out of this country!


10 posted on 09/16/2007 12:10:06 PM PDT by ronnie raygun (Id rather be hunting with dick than driving with ted)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

Incredible! I’m sick of this treason and these pukes!


11 posted on 09/16/2007 12:12:47 PM PDT by WKUHilltopper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
as long as the weapons are for peaceful purposes.

What weapons are for peaceful purposes again?

I'm so upset with you, RW. As if I didn't have enough on my plate concerning the un. (though you didn't mean to) Now you have prodded me into digging around about the Space Treaty. lol

I have so many articles on it I don't know where to begin.

12 posted on 09/16/2007 12:13:22 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun
The UN is the worlds toilet bowl. Time to flush it out of this country!

I'm on board with that.

13 posted on 09/16/2007 12:14:35 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold
Now the present Bush administration is backing full ratification

More betrayal of our sovereignty.

14 posted on 09/16/2007 12:14:51 PM PDT by SIDENET (I don't want to find "common ground" with a bunch of damn leftists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold
"1. The U.S. would be answerable to a UN unelected tribunal for all matters which involve the Seas and ocean borders of our nation."

Makes sense to me. Think how much cheaper it is for us to get rid of our navy (and control of the seas) than China or Russia spending all their $ to build a navy with all those carriers to send us back to where we belong. /s

Face it. We have repeatedly elected a whole lot of traitors to power in this country in both parties and they have sold us out and are on the verge of doing us in for their own benefit.

15 posted on 09/16/2007 12:15:11 PM PDT by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WKUHilltopper
Incredible! I’m sick of this treason and these pukes!

You aren't the only one my FRiend.

16 posted on 09/16/2007 12:15:34 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SIDENET
More betrayal of our sovereignty.

YES!

17 posted on 09/16/2007 12:16:25 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold
In May the Bush Administration at the behest of career diplomats in the State Department urged the United States Senate to ratify all provision of the Treaty and the vote for this ratification begins on September 27th. In the past either a Republican President like Reagan or a Republican Majority in the Senate has blocked any ratification of the treaty. Now with a Democrat Majority who favors all UN control provides a distinct possibility of fully ratifying this treaty.

Do I even have to say it?

18 posted on 09/16/2007 12:17:47 PM PDT by DoughtyOne ((Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking its heritage.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

Don’t waste much time on the UN Space Treaties. We are decades from an actual confrontation on the moon, although

http://spaceflightnow.com/delta/d327/070911tothepad.html

The long-awaited voyage of NASA’s Dawn space probe to rendezvous with a pair of small worlds in the asteroid belt has returned to the launching pad for departure from Earth in two weeks’ time.


Vesta and Ceres are too big to mine anyway


19 posted on 09/16/2007 12:18:17 PM PDT by RightWhale (Snow above 2000')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: penowa
Makes sense to me. Think how much cheaper it is for us to get rid of our navy (and control of the seas) than China or Russia spending all their $ to build a navy with all those carriers to send us back to where we belong. /s

It's a sad state when sarcasm has a ring of truth to it. *shakes head*

Face it. We have repeatedly elected a whole lot of traitors to power in this country in both parties and they have sold us out and are on the verge of doing us in for their own benefit.

A heart wrenching agreement with that statement.

20 posted on 09/16/2007 12:20:43 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

This would also give the U.N. any oil rights outside of the territorial waters the U.N. would be able to set. Look for territorial waters to be reduced to 50 feet.


21 posted on 09/16/2007 12:21:12 PM PDT by DoughtyOne ((Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking its heritage.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Do I even have to say it?

No............

22 posted on 09/16/2007 12:22:00 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

I still don’t believe we are being given all the information on LOST. I just opened the UN ratification documents and the U.S.A. ratified LOST August 1996

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/reference_files/status2007.pdf


23 posted on 09/16/2007 12:23:18 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
PING!!

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

FReepmail to be added to the Congress Watch Ping List.

Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. -John Adams

24 posted on 09/16/2007 12:23:24 PM PDT by Politicalmom (Of the potential GOP front runners, FT has one of the better records on immigration.- NumbersUSA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Interesting. Thanks for the link, another bookmark to add to my growing collection.

Vesta is believed to be solid rock. The oval-shaped object has an average diameter of approximately 320 miles. But Ceres could harbor water or ice beneath its rocky crust. The "baby planet" has an average diameter of about 600 miles.

We are decades from an actual confrontation on the moon, although

Hasn't china, russia and I think Japan been talking about moon shots?

25 posted on 09/16/2007 12:27:09 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

26 posted on 09/16/2007 12:28:59 PM PDT by RightWhale (Snow above 2000')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

http://spaceflightnow.com/h2a/selene/070914launch.html

The Selenological and Engineering Explorer - or SELENE - is the first of four lunar explorers set for launch before the end of next year. Orbiters from China, India and the United States will soon join Kaguya at the moon.

The orbiter was nicknamed Kaguya after thousands of suggestions were submitted to JAXA by members of the public. The probe was named after a character in a popular ancient Japanese folktale.


The USA is in the race, but private industry is shut out. The Google challenge will not prospect, so does not count per the Treaty.


27 posted on 09/16/2007 12:31:52 PM PDT by RightWhale (Snow above 2000')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

One need only follow the money. The un wants to be monetarily independent from the US and the rest of the world. We won’t be holding their purse strings any longer. This will give them that opportunity.


28 posted on 09/16/2007 12:32:01 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

I completely agree. First off, they’ll create an army to enforce their will.

This is serious stuff folks.


29 posted on 09/16/2007 12:35:15 PM PDT by DoughtyOne ((Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking its heritage.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Thank you for that link. Bookmarked.

I lost hundreds of bookmarks on the un. We had a power failure a week or so ago and I lost everything.

I'm building them back up.

We aren't being given all the info. We're being fed a bill of goods.

Lugar, I despise that basturd.

30 posted on 09/16/2007 12:39:32 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Nope, the article posted here is propaganda.

The Clinton Administration RATIFIED LOST. Not only did they ratify it, a footnote was added so it wouldn’t go into affect until December 2001!

WHY?

Here, read it yourself:

UN ratification documents and the U.S.A. ratified LOST August 1996

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/reference_files/status2007.pdf

The Bush Administration has been trying to dispute or recapitulate the Treaty.

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/settlement_of_disputes/choice_procedure.htm

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Declaration:

“In accordance with article 30 (4) of the Agreement, the Government of the United States of America declares that it chooses a special arbitral tribunal to be constituted in accordance with Annex VIII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 for the settlement of disputes pursuant to Part VIII of the Agreement.”

Someone has been flaming this LOST story incorrectly. I would like to know why.


31 posted on 09/16/2007 12:39:36 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

bump!

You know what is really disturbing? That footnote to keep LOST from becoming active until December 2001.

Did someone know we were going to be hit the fall 2001 and want to restrict a response?

Just what came to my head is all.


32 posted on 09/16/2007 12:41:17 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Japan launched this week. It's a pretty large orbiter, resource analysis.

For what resources can be found on the moon for future exploration for mining?

33 posted on 09/16/2007 12:42:39 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

The treaty is already in effect. Whether the US signs or not is irrelevant.


34 posted on 09/16/2007 12:43:28 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

NO!!!!NEVER!!!


35 posted on 09/16/2007 12:45:03 PM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Orbiters from China, India and the United States will soon join Kaguya at the moon.

That's what I remember reading. Russia was mentioned somewhere in my lost bookmarks. Damn

The USA is in the race, but private industry is shut out. The Google challenge will not prospect, so does not count per the Treaty.

Thank you.

36 posted on 09/16/2007 12:46:12 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

From reading the article, it appears you are correct. I would never sign on to that nonsense though.

The U.N. has proven it’self to be a flawed concept gone terribly bad. I would never lend it any credibility.


37 posted on 09/16/2007 12:47:43 PM PDT by DoughtyOne ((Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking its heritage.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Bommer
Trusting the UN with anything is like asking a child molester to babysit!

Worth repeating!!!

38 posted on 09/16/2007 12:50:14 PM PDT by AuntB (" It takes more than walking across the border to be an American." Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
No, clinton signed it in '94. It hasn't been ratified yet.

Bush called for it to be ratified this month.

39 posted on 09/16/2007 12:53:55 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Do I even have to say it?

Oh, please do, you say it so well.

40 posted on 09/16/2007 12:55:08 PM PDT by AuntB (" It takes more than walking across the border to be an American." Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Excellent post, thank you for the info.


41 posted on 09/16/2007 12:58:49 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

That is not what page 9 of the PDF says. It says signed, August 21, 1996, with a footnote to take affect December 2001.


42 posted on 09/16/2007 1:04:09 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
International Tribunal for Law of Sea

The International Tribunal, established by the Convention, is one of the dispute-settlement forums to which parties might submit their disputes. It has exclusive jurisdiction in disputes concerning deep seabed mineral resources,

provides advisory opinions when called upon to do so, and may be called upon to prescribe injunctive relief or provisional measures before a case or dispute was to be decided on the merits. Most often, the Tribunal’s injunctive and provisional measures have been directed at cases involving the detention of vessels and their crew. The Tribunal holds its meetings and hears cases at its seat in Hamburg, Germany. It is composed of 21 members (judges) elected to nine-year terms.

We, the US, will have but one vote in any dispute created by unclos. One vote.

Taking the un's past records in supporting us, how do you think they'll vote when a dispute arises?

43 posted on 09/16/2007 1:12:57 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
That is not what page 9 of the PDF says. It says signed, August 21, 1996, with a footnote to take affect December 2001.

I'm sorry for the delay. God I miss my bookmarks. Give me a minute.

44 posted on 09/16/2007 1:14:38 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

I don’t know. And Clinton should be jailed for doing this to us.


45 posted on 09/16/2007 1:16:19 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

If you have trouble opening that PDF, let me know and I’ll take a screen capture and post it.

I’m going to cube some buffalo meat now, be back later.

(tidbit, buffalo makes the best sauces!)


46 posted on 09/16/2007 1:17:46 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Bommer

“Is Bush the Anti-Christ or was the left always right about him being dumber than a box of rocks??”

Yes.


47 posted on 09/16/2007 1:41:15 PM PDT by Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

48 posted on 09/16/2007 1:42:54 PM PDT by RightWhale (Snow above 2000')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
This is from the un site.

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/status.htm

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was open for signature on 10 December 1982 and entered into force on 16 November 1994. Out of 159 original UNCLOS signatories, 29 have yet to ratify. From among 38 States that did not sign UNCLOS or were not independent States at the time of its opening for signature, 17 have acceded or succeeded to it. Certain coastal States have not yet expressed their consent to be bound by the Convention. These were, as at 30 September 2005: five in the African region (Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and Morocco); 10 in Asia (Cambodia, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Israel, Niue, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Turkey and United Arab Emirates), one in North America (United States of America) and six in Latin America and the Caribbean

I'm looking for their list of countries.

We have not ratified it - yet.

49 posted on 09/16/2007 2:12:59 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Bommer

50 posted on 09/16/2007 2:14:05 PM PDT by Diogenesis (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-224 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson