Call your representative today and protect your familes rights: 202-224-3121 In current times, top US cupboard officers have traveled around the globe on high profile diplomatic missions Ironically, within the procedure of Secretary of State Hillary Clintons go to to the Arctic Circle and Secretary of Protection Leon Panettas travels in Asia, they both undercut the situation for the U N
Ocean Initiative controversial Regulation in the Sea Treaty Misplaced a situation theyd jointly produced prior to departing in testimony before the Senate Overseas Relations Committee
Mrs Clinton took component inside a meeting from the Arctic Council, whose eight members have territory in that region Of these, just 5 Russia, Canada, Norway, Denmarks Greenland and the United states really have coasts around the Arctic Ocean, and therefore can claim rights to the sources offshore
To be sure, the secretary of State utilized the event of her joining another Arctic nations for the objective of forging a brand new region wide search and rescue SandR agreement to express the Obama administrations commitment to Misplaced 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
Still, this SandR agreement suggests the well known items: It is far easier to achieve understandings inside a group of eight or, even better, 5 nations that have similar, if not identical, interests and a shared understanding from the stakes, than among a group of 150 plus nations, most of whom do not
If that is true for an accord governing assistance to downed planes and ships Misplaced at sea, it surely is the situation when it comes towards the disposition of potentially many trillions of dollars worth of undersea oil and coal deposits
Meanwhile, our Protection secretary was off in Asia trying to shore up Americas alliances in the area without actually saying that China is a threat that needs to be countered there So he eschewed the presidents much touted strategic pivot from your 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 produced commitments about a future US presence in the theater that have been deeply discounted in light of ongoing, and approaching, sharp cuts in protection spending
It happens that Secretary Panettas enthusiasm for the Law of the Sea Treaty tracks with Team Obamas public efforts to low ball the hazards posed by Chinas increasingly aggressive behavior toward our Asian friends and allies, and its growing ability 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 Misplaced, international legislation 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
Ocean Initiative That claim is, among other things, incompatible together with the treatys rules Its no wonder Beijing notified the UN 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 sources, it strongly militates against the united states allowing itself to be bound to a treaty whose core provisions ie, those governing limitations on territorial claims and mandatory dispute resolutions are already being serially violated by Communist China
On May 9, Secretary Panetta nonetheless testified that 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 able to influence those treaty bodies that develop and interpret the Law of the Sea
That is simply not 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
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 to the international oceans
Ocean Initiative Meanwhile, china will get away with picking which rules they may abide by and which they wont
Mr Chang puts it this way: China is a signatory to 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 Federal Government 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?
