U.S. accession to UNCLOS necessary to restore international maritime leadership

Advocates against U.S. accession believe it would disadvantage U.S. interests and place the U.S. under the thumb of the ISA.¹⁶⁸ The assertion that U.S. interests will be lost in the sea of interests of the other 167 Member States is misplaced.¹⁶⁹ U.S. interests have not been represented, in part, due to its 33-year absence.¹⁷⁰ The deep seabed mining framework continued to develop and gain popularity despite the U.S.’s absence.¹⁷¹ Only by acceding to UNCLOS, will the U.S. regain its proper place as a world leader in shaping the law of the sea while representing its own interests in the proper international arena—before the ISA.¹⁷²

When the treaty was still gaining its sea legs, the U.S.’s influential impact was evident through its ability to band seven industrialized nations¹⁷³ into forming the Provisional Understanding, an agreement that operated outside the ISA’s purview.¹⁷⁴ After the ISA declared the Provisional Understanding “wholly illegal” under UNCLOS, all seven members of the treaty essentially abandoned the U.S. and ratified the treaty in the 1990’s.¹⁷⁵ The realization that the ISA’s deep seabed mining was becoming increasingly appealing became a significant factor in the U.S. diminishing influence over matters relating to the law of the sea.¹⁷⁶