Arguments: Most Active
- Applying UNCLOS model to outer space would stifle nascent commercial space industry
- Ratification of UNCLOS establishes flawed precedent for development of frontier that would carry over into space
- UNCLOS model could be extended to cyberspace with devastating economic impact
- Should reject UNCLOS before its model spreads to other commons including outer space and the internet
- UNCLOS model could be extended into outer space to the detriment of U.S. freedom of action
- U.S. ratification of UNCLOS will validate model for international governance of all global commons with adverse consequences for its military space program
The solutions the international community worked out to resolve some of the most contentious issues over ocean governance -- specifically, how to equitably divide up a common shared resource, how to sustainably manage the global commons for the benefit of all, and how to ensure all states have the freedom to navigate a global common -- have potential to serve as the basis for a similar agreement for outer space.
- China's use of lawfare to constrain US naval action may be precursor to how they will attempt same in outer space
- UNCLOS offers most practical legal model for outer space for several reasons
- Should apply lessons learned during UNCLOS negotiations over exploiting seabed to outer space
- UNCLOS model offers novel solutions to regulation of outer space domain
- ... and 10 more quote(s)
Since UNCLOS is the basis of modern international law of the sea, the U.S. should ratify the Convention in order to more effectively exercise, maintain, and perpetuate its leadership and to strengthen the normative framework that UNCLOS provides.
- UNCLOS has proven itself as valuable global framework for resolving maritime conflicts
- UNCLOS is a remarkable peacetime achievement in resolving border disputes without conflict
- U.S. can best leverage norming effect of international law by ratifying UNCLOS
- U.S. ratification of UNCLOS will help U.S. resolve 30-40 existing boundary disputes
- ... and 5 more quote(s)
UNCLOS specifically guarantees the right to conduct transits through international straits in "normal modes", which may include submerged transit in the case of submarines. UNCLOS does not explicitly prohibit submerged transit in territorial seas altogether, especially in international straits.
- UNCLOS will not impact U.S. submarine operations
- UNCLOS convention would have no unique effect on ability of submarines to collect intelligence beyond restrictions already agreed to in 1958 convention
- Concerns about submarine passage (article 20) ignore more restrictive requirements of 1958 convention U.S. is already party to
By ratifying UNCLOS, the United States would be submitting itself to a much wider range of international controls than it has in the past and would give more power and legitimacy to misguided efforts to establish a supra-national government at the United Nations.
- Regulatory reach of UNCLOS could be unconstrained given the interconnected nature of the ocean ecosystem
- ISA will promulgate regulations on nations outside of U.S. control
- Regulatory activism from ISA would stifle innovation and entrepreneurship
- Ratification of UNCLOS would allow regulators to run rampant, reaching far into all economic sectors
- ... and 14 more quote(s)
The UNCLOS treaty was originally concieved as a way to redistribute wealth on a global scale and the international regulatory structure that remains will likely inhibit development, depress productivity, increase costs, and discourage innovation.
- Worst problem with the Law of the Sea treaty is its resource management regime which establishes a cartel, squashes innovation, and redistributes revenues to non-state actors
- Anti-production and anti-competitive bias of UNCLOS evident in its establishment of cartels and quotas
- Regime setup by UNCLOS to govern deep seabed mining would stifle innovation with regulations
- US accession to UNCLOS would place mining interests directly under regulatory regime of the Authority
- UNCLOS based on outdated and discredited redistributionist ideas from the 1970s
UNCLOS is silent on how UNCLOS nations that receive Article 82 royalty revenue should spend it. Recipients are apparently free to spend the funds on military expenditures or simply deposit them into the personal bank accounts of national leaders.
- UNCLOS bureaucracy would redistribute money to dictatorships and be managed by corrupt and unaccountable U.N.
- U.S. seat on ISA board won't necessarily prevent article 82 revenue from going to our adversaries and dictatorships
- UNCLOS has no restrictions on how recipient nations under article 82 have to spend the money
- Article 82 redistribution payments could be used to prop up corrupt governments
Undersea cables are a valuable commodity in the 21st century global communication environment. The undersea consortium is owned by various international companies such as ATT, and these companies provide high-speed broadband connectivity and capacity for large geographic areas that are important entities of trade and communications around the globe. If undersea cables were cut or disrupted outside of the U.S.
- Empirically, disruption of undersea cables cost millions of dollars an hour in lost revenue
- Underseas cables handle trillions of dollars of transactions a day and help sustain global banking industry
- U.S. banking and military command systems rely on underseas cables
- Recent underseas cable attacks show the impact of their disruption
- ... and 11 more quote(s)