LOST, the Law of the Sea Treaty, that was originally drafted in the 1980's has once again been brought before a senate committee for ratification.
The committee has unanimously approved this treaty which would in effect hand over the protection of our rights in international waters to a United
Nations sponsored organization. Many groups concerned with maintaining our autonomy, have raised a cry against the passage of this treatyl that
President Bush has indicated he would sign.
George W. Bush has worked hard, particularly since the 9/11 attacks, to emulate the principled, conservative and consequential presidency of one of
his most formidable predecessors, Ronald Reagan. So, why would President Bush want to make one of his top foreign policy priorities the ratification
of an accord--the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (better known as the Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST)--that President Reagan rejected
22 years ago?
This decision is all the more puzzling since the Law of the Sea Treaty has not improved with age. In fact, there has been no change to the treaty
whatsoever from the document Reagan found wanting.
To be sure, in 1994, the Clinton Administration negotiated a separate accord (called "the Agreement") that proponents claim "fixed" the Reagan
objections. But the truth of the matter is that, like so many other Clinton flim-flams, this one is not the real deal since LOST has not actually been
amended at all.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
This seems to be a very dangerous treaty that opens the pocketbooks of nations world wide to UN taxation, since it gives the UN the right to dictate
and govern the oceans and sea floor. basically it would mandate that all companies and governments that seek to mine, drill, harvest, or develop the
sea or the sea floor must obtain a permit and pay fees to the UN.
The treaty is in its original 1980's format since no changes to it have been ratified. It was originally drafted in the cold war and has cold war
politics stamped all over its pages. President Bush's support for this treaty has many political groups scratching their heads and others nashing
their teeth. Of further interest is the lack of resistance this treaty received in the Senate. The treaty represents the largest hand over of
American autonomy in U.S. history yet the news media has not reported a word of it. It passed quietly through the Senate committee and will soon be
voted on before the whole senate.
Certainly such a monumental hand over of power deserves a national debate on the issue. While the news media are reporting on Michael Jackson's
trial, our leaders are quietly handing over our nations rights in international waters to the UN. After the recent oil for food scandal and the
corruption that it revealed within the highest levels of leadership in the UN, I for one am unwilling to give them yet more power.
It is imperative that we have a national debate on this issue and that it not be passed into law in the dark. This is a HUGE issue that has far
reaching implications for our nation and the world. To try to sneak it into law is unethical and corrupt politics. It scares me that both the
Democrats and Republicans are supporting this. We need to hold our leaders accountable for this treaty and not allow this to be passed without first
having a national debate on the issue. Our national sovereignty on the seas is at stake here!
Related News Links:
[edit on 3-3-2005 by Banshee]