Evidence: Alphabetical
- Protection of freedom of navigation rights is key to laundry list of national security objectives
- Pernicious effect of technology transfer provision still in effect even after 1994 agreement
- Parties to UNCLOS can oppose amendments to ambiguous policies
- Protections for underseas cables upgraded in UNCLOS
- Principle of the common heritage of mankind enshrined in UNCLOS makes no moral or practical sense
- Peaceful resolution of Arctic territorial disputes will be a boon to global economy and stability
- Participation in CLCS through framework of UNCLOS is not necessary to secure claims in Arctic
- PSI initiatives in Pacific region are strengthening basis for further multilateral cooperation
- Protection of global commons will require cooperative efforts to develop and strengthen international governance regimes
- Protection of global underseas cable infrastructure is critical to global economy and security
- Procedures of CLCS commission are empirically working with countries working peacefully together to resolve disputed claims
- Potential mineral wealth in seabed exceeds existing land deposits
- Political costs of relying on Freedom of Navigation program no longer worth the risks
- Process of reaching agreement with UNCLOS will prove valuable as similar effort to develop space law unfolds
- Pernicious effects of the international tribunal and "innocent passage" clause on U.S. security warrants rejection of UNCLOS
- Prospects for interstate conflict over oil and gas reserves in Arctic remains remote
- Political differences between Arctic states and competing goals doom bilateral approach to resolving disputes
- Protection of freedom of navigation rights critical to mobility U.S. navy relies on to responding to crises
- Political and economic costs from freedom of navigation program demand an alternative
- Protection of underseas cables in Article 113 in UNCLOS is insufficient considering their critical importance