Counterfactual claims are invalid - UNCLOS would not constrain U.S. capacity for self-defense
Myth #8: Had the United States been subject to the Law of the Sea Treaty, President Kennedy could not have quarantined Cuba with the U.S. Navy, President Ford could not have used the Navy to rescue the Mayaguez, and President Reagan could not have sent a Navy carrier force to defy Qaddafi of Libya in the Gulf.
This is completely untrue. All the above operations were conducted in accordance with international law.
- President Kennedy established a quarantine around Cuba under the authorities of the UN Charter (Article 51 on self-defense and Article 52 on regional security arrangements) and the Rio Treaty (which established the Organization of American States (OAS)). On October 23, 1962, OAS voted to approve a U.S.-sponsored quarantine of Cuba.
- President Ford’s use of military force to rescue the Mayaguez and its crew was a lawful use of force in self defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
- President Reagan deployed an aircraft carrier task force into the Gulf of Sidra to challenge Libya’s unlawful claim that the Gulf was Libyan internal waters. During U.S. freedom of navigation operations in the Gulf, United States Navy aircraft engaged Libyan aircraft in self-defense in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. The Convention does not in any manner whatsoever restrict, condition or infringe upon our inherent right of self-defense as reflected in Article 51 of the UN Charter. Nor does it affect our rights under the law of armed conflict. The Law of the Sea Convention does not constrain or limit the President's options to defend our country; it enhances them by codifying navigation rights and freedoms that are essential for the global mobility of our armed forces and the sustainment of our combat troops.
Keywords:
Eight National Security Myths: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea . Office of the Judge Advocate General: Washington Navy Yard, DC, Undated [ More (5 quotes) ]
Quicktabs: Evidence
Arguments
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
-
Some opponents of UNCLOS have argued that by ratifying UNCLOS, U.S. military forces could be subject to adverse ruling by international tribunals through the dispute resolution mechanisms of the treaty. However, the U.S. defense department has reviewed the relevant law and has found no undue liability risk to U.S. forces. Furthermore, in the Senate's Advice and Consent resolution that would ratify UNCLOS, the U.S. has taken advantage of article 298(1) in UNCLOS to exempt itself from all dispute settlement.
Keywords:Related Quotes:- US advice and consent resolution regarding UNCLOS already excludes military activities from third party arbitration
- On balance the U.S should welcome the dispute resolution mechanisms in the treaty
- U.S. can issue signing statement upon ratifying UNCLOS that clarifies to interpretation of the military activities exemption
- U.S. can exempt its military activities from dispute resolution tribunals
- ... and 10 more quote(s)
Supporting Arguments: