What Americans want in UNCLOS?

20 years ago, 10 years ago and perhaps even 5 years ago, joining the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is important but not urgent. viec lam dau khi Now the situation is not like that anymore "- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said at a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee United States on 05/23/2012.

UNCLOS is a true problem in the most ambiguous recommend dipping camera quan sat in U.S. politics. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama have expressed support but so far through the UNCLOS process in the U.S. is at a halt ...

In UNCLOS, the U.S. is no gain?

Along with Hillary Clinton's presence at the hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee also Defence Minister Leon Panetta and President of the U.S. coalition commander Martin E. Dempsey. Arguments (to convince) was made to UNCLOS not only help expand U.S. territorial waters (up to an area covering approximately 776.900km2) but also help ease the U.S. mining and oil at sea world without being bound by the restrictions outside UNCLOS provisions."When America was standing outside chong set the UNCLOS, the company we are facing two choices: either join the marine mining another country or accept to give up the game" - Foreign Minister Clinto said.

Obama Cabinet representative at the hearing before the Foreign Relations Committee, UNCLOS United States Senate on 05/23/2012

Clinton would refer to the rare earth mining capital in the hands of China as well as mineral-rich areas in the Arctic rare that Russia is aimed at lightweight. For his part, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey said that UNCLOS will help strengthen the U.S. military rights including the right to freedom of navigation in foreign territorial waters. Meanwhile, Defense Minister Leon Panetta said: "We're strong because we know not play by the rules against the law" ...

This is not the first time that viec lam nganh dau khi UNCLOS problem is acute controversy in the U.S.. 5 years ago, dated 31/10/2007, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, United States, who was lying under President Joseph Biden (now Vice President), ratified UNCLOS at a rate of 17/4 but it does not achieve two thirds of the votes cast in the (whole) The Senate should end the matter to be left open, even though vung tau President George W. Bush campaigned aggressively to pass through the door UNCLOS Congress general ... recently started in the U.S. UNCLOS is heated, before the evolution of the association's policy does not cover China in poison plot up the East Coast.

In a paper dated 24/04/2011 on the New York Times, three authors Thad W.Allen, Richard L. Armitage, John J. Hamre has lined up that country, before the new context and new challenges, not hesitate any more to sign UNCLOS. The authors above are "acquaintances": Allen is the former commander of United States Coast Guard; Armitage as deputy secretary of state from 2001-2005; and Hamre was deputy defense minister from 1997 to 2000. Not in the hands UNCLOS (currently 162 signatory countries), the United States it is difficult to talk to China in the Pacific - the authors assert ...

Why can not sign UNCLOS?

The reason UNCLOS further difficulty is that it is hitting the stone wall of opposition factions which are not without weight faces affected. Writing in the Wall Street Journal (29/09/2011), the authors John Bolton (U.S. Ambassador to the UN from 2005 to 2006) and Dan Blumenthal (former director in charge of China and Taiwan Office of the Minister U.S. Department of Defense) - although both famous and extreme anti-China - has said that the U.S. signed the UNCLOS only further strain relations with China, limited range of the U.S. Navy nor What solves the statement relating Sea occupied by point-shaped line of Beijing.

Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee John Kerry said the United States UNCLOS issues discussed will be suspended until after the U.S. presidential election

The authors said that the matter surveillance, intelligence by customs - Air Force was not mentioned in UNCLOS, should the present time, the U.S. completely "clean hit" in the EEZ of China. Once signed in and comply with UNCLOS and marine - U.S. Air Force will have the greatest difficulty to reach the EEZ of a country (like the way it was trouble when the U.S. entered the EEZ). Being able to "free shipping", the U.S. Navy now (assuming like Washington have signed UNCLOS) had to ask for permission to operate the new China!

The dominance of American freedom of navigation are present can not be exchanged for smaller several benefits that membership brings UNCLOS. In other words, the answer of the equation of interest and political power sea patently clear: the U.S., not just words if there is loss in UNCLOS. Furthermore, it is emphasized that the United States - as well as the countries participating in UNCLOS - would absolutely veto any adverse problems for themselves. It is this makes the opinions of opponents to persuade the dose increased.

In fact, the most important reasons for refusal UNCLOS - like every time Ronald Reagan rejected in 1982 - is the text of Part XI of UNCLOS. This truly is the biggest hurdle for advocates in the U.S. UNCLOS. In this section, viec lam nganh dau khi UNCLOS Administration regulations international seabed (ISA, currently representing 18 countries) have full jurisdiction over all waters and what it contains, including seabed resources. Based in Jamaica, ISA also have the right to tax and collect taxes, fees, licenses ... for the Exploration of the Sea projects; enforce quotas for ocean mining and oil extraction ...

For those who oppose U.S. UNCLOS, to an agency "at Matthew" nothing to do America has the right to authorize and collect taxes for corporate America is "weird" not acceptable. American businesses must "offer" to feed an external organization has the control of American interests is "weird" not acceptable. The U.S. Navy must obtain a license in Jamaica (ISA) to be able to travel in the international straits or ISA report what they are doing is an insult not acceptable ...

Moreover, the ISA may have the right to ask the U.S. to share intelligence information, technical information and even military operations. The same mechanism of ISA, UNCLOS also established the International Court of Law of the Sea (ITLOS, based in Hamburg, Germany), with powers to arbitrate and can decide any legal dispute. What makes people protest in the U.S. UNCLOS concerns that some anti-American countries are represented in the ITLOS will definitely make rulings unfavorable to the United States. In addition, ITLOS has no legal appeal, while no U.S. court can interfere with the decision of ITLOS ...

Clearly, the adoption of UNCLOS in the United States never easy. However, Washington has the patience to "fast" again and those who oppose U.S. UNCLOS will also "warm neatly burp" What's more, if more and more Chinese go further in the competition for the South China Sea by the campaign accountdistorted use of UNCLOS?

In general, the legal framework of all disputes concerning the right to exploit the sea as the sea, as you know, within the framework of UNCLOS - international agreements obtained from series of conferences from 1973 to viec lam nganh dau khi 1982 with the appointment supplemented in 1994. UNCLOS was only intended to rearrange the order of the territorial sea as well as the right to replace the old laws such as "the three nautical mile range" - calculated by the fall of a cannon shot from the edge results from the initiative of the law Dutch Bynkershoek Cornelius (1673-1743). All waters outside the country is considered international waters, where anyone is allowed to exploit but not owned by anyone. In 1945, U.S. President Harry Truman extended territorial control to protect all natural resources of the U.S. continental shelf. Many countries follow immediately. From 1946 to 1950, Argentina, Chile, Peru and Ecuador began to expand control of the territorial sea out to 200 nautical miles.

Before 1967, only 25 countries used by the "cannon falls" (three knots) while 66 countries have used the law 12 knots and 8 water 200 nautical law. Before the chaos of territorial control, in 1956, the United Nations organized the first conference on the Law of the Sea. Monday meeting was held in 1960 and the third conference held in 1973 (lasting until 1982 with the participation of more than 160 countries) viec lam nganh dau khi . UNCLOS 1982 Content refers to the concept of EEZ (exclusive economic zone sea) whereby the range of 200 nautical miles (370km) is under the sovereignty of a country and they are right to exploit marine resources. 1982 UNCLOS also defines the concept of continental shelf - (it's) part (the seabed) are considered open land stretches from the national territory. National continental shelf may be longer than 200 nautical miles (by land until such long end).