Law of the Sea

Politics are confusing. Here is an issue I had no idea existed.

I first read about this the uear before last Spring in a Kodiak newspaper article about a retiring Coast Guard Commander supporting its ratification. But when I looked it up in the Internet, opposition tremendously outnumbered support.

Apparently, if a disagreement occurs between nations concerning what is referenced in the treaty, it goeCs to an UN court in a Caribbean country. That just won't fly with many Americans. Ronald Reagan opposed it; Bush I opposed it.

Clinton made requests for ammendments and got them into the treaty, but political power in Congress changed hands and he didn't bring it up. Bush II supported it but apparently he had too much on his plate.

Now Obama , I think, supports it. But that really doesn't matter: nothing will pass in this divided Congress.

Look up some Internet sites an make up your own mind. But as I see it, many are loosing sight of the forest because of the trees.

Here is how I see it. 1/4 of the world's undiscovered oil is thought to be in the Arctic, along the Arctic's Continental Shelf. With melting of the ice, this will be accessible to drilling. If we sign the treaty we get access to the oil and minerals in our Continental Shelf beyond our current 200 mile limit; if not, we are limited in access to 200 miles from Alaska.

So, what if we have to pay 1to 7% of the profits of what is removed to the international community?

93% of something is a lot better than none.

I know that some say we should not drill in the Arctic. But let's be real: I've read China has been sending it's ocean floor mapping ships to explore this area.....and they don't even have land bordering this area. They are now building more ice breaker ships than we do. Do you think they just like to explore for the fun of it?

Call me a pessimist, but I think we run a high risk of them drilling just outside the US's 200 mile limit of we don't sign the treaty that gives primary access to those assets. What do you think will happen when they ask the UN's " Court" to let them excersice their "rIghts" to the assets in the unclaimed part of the world?

You read about it; see if I am right. Maybe the melatonin from the long nights is affecting my thinking.

But, if you agree, write your Congressman supporting the signing of this treaty. Don't let the current bickering in Washington affect the squandering away of these assets to an international court who'd decide who can drill just outside the 200 miles in OUR Continental Shelf.

Here is the most recent current local article:

http://kodiakdailymirror.com/view/full_story/16434830/article-Sen--Begich-vows-to-push-ratification-of-Law-of-the-Sea-Treaty?instance=do_not_publish_here

Google "law of the sea treaty" and you will find dozens of articles and opinions. Here is a typical one :

http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2011/07/law-of-sea-treaty-could-cost-us-trillions

OK, I'll shut up for now...and go on a hike. You research this and see if I am right.