Op-eds & Editorials

The Institute for Liberty (IFL) has come to the conclusion that ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty is the most important property rights and wealth building step that America can take to maintain our leading superpower status and to exponentially grow our economy. There has been a tremendous amount of disinformation about this treaty. In fact, just earlier this year, IFL thought we knew the truth about what was termed “LOST” and we signed a letter opposing ratification. We, like so many other conservatives, were given bad information. ... Trillions of dollars, global property rights for U.S. interests, critical navigation rights, and veto power over an international fund that could end up in adversarial hands is what is at stake. Ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty will grow the U.S. economy while protecting our military and strategic interests around the world.

Andrew Langer is the president of the Institute for Liberty.

... When Congress closed up shop before the election, lawmakers also left dangling a host of important measures that could help boost our recovery. During the lame duck, they must work to bring some of them over the finish line, including passage of Russia PNTR, approval of the Law of the Sea Treaty, regulatory reform, cybersecurity legislation and a high-skilled immigration bill. Political gridlock is a luxury this nation can no longer afford. We face tremendous challenges. The longer we delay, the more painful the solutions will be. The business community stands ready to work with the president and Congress to bolster economic growth, create jobs and achieve a Big Deal to restore our nation’s fiscal balance. It’s time to get down to business.

Thomas J. Donohue is president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

... The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea Treaty is a globally agreed legal framework for the management of the world’s oceans. Navigational freedoms, including the freedom of movement of warships through the high seas, international straits and archipelagic waters, are deeply embedded in the Law of the Sea Treaty. Crucially, insofar as claims to maritime territory and rights to development of seabed resources are concerned, the treaty provides for a technical body of experts—the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf—to assess and verify the competing claims of various states. Provision for law-based dispute settlement of conflicting claims is also provide for, as well as a framework for joint and cooperative development of such contested zones in the interim. Apart from the U.S., all other Arctic Council members have ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty.

Sourabh Gupta is a Senior Research Associate at Samuels International Associates Inc., and Dr. Ashok K. Roy is the Vice President for Finance & Administration / Chief Financial Officer for the University of Alaska system.

Why this dash to the North Pole? An ice-free Arctic holds the promise of undiscovered oil and gas deposits and of shipping lanes that could cut the travel distance between Rotterdam and Yokohama by about 4,450 miles. Unfortunately the legal framework in place to facilitate international cooperation is weak, and it is being further undermined by the unilateral actions of Arctic nations seeking to enforce their claims to a slice of the territory. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea allows countries to extend their territory beyond 200 nautical miles along a “natural extension” of their continental shelf. The five countries with Arcticcoastlines — Russia, the United States, Canada, Norway and Denmark (via Greenland) — have 10 years from the date they ratify the Law of the Sea to submit their claims. Russia ratified the convention in 1997; the United States has signed but not yet ratified.

Elizabeth Plantan is a doctoral student at Cornell University focusing on environmental politics in Russia and China.