No Law of Sea Treaty
by Tom DeWeese

Freedom of the seas has been the guiding principle recognized by sovereign nations since ancient times. It means all nations recognize that ships, government owned or private, are free to sail the seas wherever they like, carrying their cargoes to ports of call for free trade among nations. Freedom of the seas also means the right to mine and fish the resources of the seas, unhindered.

Nations have traditionally claimed a slim line along their coasts as sovereign territory for protection of national interests and defense. Three miles out from shore has been the traditional limit recognized by nations. That distance used to represent the range of a cannon on shore. Any waters outside such limited claims have been understood to be free of control. The rights of individuals and private companies to use the seas for pleasure and commerce has been unquestioned.

That is all about to change. In the name of "social equity," a euphemism for "redistribution of the wealth," the UN's Law of the Sea Treaty is set to replace the freedom of the seas concept with central control from an international body, specifically the United Nations. Under UN control a new supranational agency has been created called the Seabed Authority.

The Seabed Authority would be organized identically to the UN General Assembly using the one nation, one vote model. That means that numerous, tiny Third World nations can organize a block of votes hostile to the United States and other industrial nations. Such a setup has created an unworkable situation in the General Assembly and it is why that body achieves very little. Now, the same gridlock expects to rule the seas of the world.

The Seabed Authority would have the power to regulate all the seas -- roughlly seven-tenths of the world’s surface area. It will have the sole power to issue permits for fishing and mining and drilling operations under the surface. It can fix prices of sea products and impose quotas on how much is produced. It can levy international taxes and impose production quotas on deep-sea mining and oil production; control ocean research and exploration; and create a multinational court to enforce its dictates. Do not be surprised to see Seabed Authority ships plying the waters, stalking ships, and mining and drilling operations it deems in violation of its authority.

The Seabed Authority could force governments and private companies to file for permits and impose fees and it can delay production for years. Yet, in the end, after charging up to a million dollars for permit fees, there is nothing in the Treaty that requires the Authority to ever issue even a single permit. In addition, the provisions establishing the Authority give it the power to set up its own mining and drilling activities, and compete right next to private efforts. That provision alone should set off alarm bells concerning the fairness of permit decisions.

The revenues raised by the Seabed Authority would make it a powerful force that will likely be controlled by the Third World block. This new wealth and power may lead to the establishment of a cartel of sorts where the Third World nations could control all assets of the seas for their own interests, leaving developed nations at their mercy.

Under the Law of the Sea Treaty, U.S. national defense interests would be dangerously threatened as several provisions of the treaty would prevent inspection or boarding of suspected terrorist ships. When the U.S. invaded Afghanistan after the 9-11 terrorist attacks, several ships controlled by al Qaeda were seen fleeing the area and were chased down and boarded by U.S. war ships. Equipment, weapons and the terrorists who owned them were apprehended.

Yet the treaty offers still more of a threat to our national interests. It demands that nations share information with all others concerning sea exploration. This provision constitutes a mandatory technology transfer and can include military secrets such as submarine detection techniques.

The most dangerous aspect of the treaty has nothing to do with the seas, however. Rather, the danger lies with the United Nations gaining the authority to impose taxes through the Seabed Authority. The UN is basically a club. It has private members who pay voluntary dues. Only governments have the power to tax, operate a court system or field armies. If the UN gains the power to tax through the Law of the Sea Treaty, the cat is out of the bag. There can then be no stopping any of hundreds of taxing schemes now floating around the UN. The UN has already established its own criminal court. Given the ability to tax, it will be two thirds on the way to becoming the global government of its dreams.

The Law of the Sea Treaty is clearly a massive threat to the sovereignty and independence of the United States and our private companies operating internationally. Is it any wonder why Senator Richard Lugar is putting pressure on Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to push the treaty through without debate and without a recorded vote. He wants none of these facts to get a public airing.

The treaty has been reborn because a massive lobbying effort has been waged by those who seek UN global governance. Environmental groups stand to gain incredible power to block oil drilling and mining. International corporations think it will be easier to deal with one central power than with multiple foreign countries. Several oil and mineral companies think they can use the treaty to gain their own form of power and cut their competition. They play to get theirs at the expense of everyone else. It's an old game played on Capitol Hill. All of them will find in the end that they’ve played a costly hand indeed.

The fight over the Law of the Sea Treaty is really an ancient one between those who believe in the concepts of private property and free markets and those who can’t conceive of anything not being controlled by government.

The seas have been free for the entire history of mankind, except when controlled by a dictator. We’ve fought pirates and Hitler to keep them open. Why would we now surrender that freedom to mindless, faceless bureaucrats who covet power and care nothing for our rights?