Evidence: Alphabetical
- U.S. ratification of UNCLOS won't help pressure China to change its position in the South China Seas
- U.S. ratification of UNCLOS would help restore global leadership on protecting marine environment
- U.S. can maintain its freedom of navigation rights in Arctic through continued application of FON program
- UNCLOS ill-suited for dealing with the issues of a melting Arctic
- U.S. reliance on customary international law to secure rights is "less certain, more risky, and more costly"
- U.S. stuck on the sidelines in the Arctic as a non-party to UNCLOS
- U.S. has considerable economic and strategic interests in development of an Arctic shipping route
- U.S. participation in Ilulissat agreement undermines claim that its non-party status to UNCLOS is hurting its ability to guide Arctic policy
- UNCLOS establishes comprehensive framework for environmental protection, bringing rest of the world up to environmental standards U.S. has already met
- U.S. failure to join UNCLOS puts freedom of navigation rights at risk in two ways
- U.S. negotiating claims disputes with Canada in Arctic bilaterally
- UNCLOS ill suited for dealing with unique environment of the Arctic
- UNCLOS not adequate for the Arctic because states can easily opt out of dispute resolution
- UNCLOS has been weakened by U.S. non-participation but it is still held as legitimate by rest of the world
- U.S. cooperation and leadership in developing dispute resolution framework for Arctic is critical
- U.S. non-party status to UNCLOS acts as a roadblock to resolution of Arctic disputes, U.S participation and leadership is required to proceed
- U.S. companies unlikely to invest in deep seabed mining without protections afforded by UNCLOS
- U.S. military's increasing reliance on weapons made from rare earth metals is another justification for ratifying UNCLOS
- U.S. lacks legitimacy in arguing that China needs to abide by UNCLOS that it would get if it ratified the treaty
- U.S. must emphasize rule of law to counter China's aggressive maritime strategy
- UNCLOS could help U.S. and Canada resolve long standing dispute over Northwest Passage
- U.S. cannot utilize mechanisms of treaty to contest Russian claims as a non party to UNCLOS
- U.S. ability to resolve Arctic disputes with Canada and Russia limited by its non party status to UNCLOS
- U.S. cannot make claims to outer continental shelf in Arctic as a non party to UNCLOS
- UNCLOS is not yet a viable regime for governing the Arctic
- U.S. courts have already recognized UNCLOS as reflecting customary international law in United States v. Alaska
- Unrealistic to expect that CLCS will be able to resolve existing Arctic disputes
- U.S. Arctic strategy implementation plan includes accession to UNCLOS
- U.S. Arctic strategy implementation plan includes submitting claims to extended continental shelf through UNCLOS
- U.S. needs to accede to UNCLOS to have credible influence over China in resolving South China Sea dispute
- Underseas cable disruptions can cascade exponentially have dramatic effect on economies
- U.S. plans to focus Arctic Council on dealing with the humanitarian and environmental effects of the warming Arctic when it assumes the chairmanship post in 2015
- U.S. can pursue its claims in the Arctic without being a party to UNCLOS through bilateral agreements
- Underseas cables have already become a target of terrorist attacks
- U.S. is not taking adequate measures to protect underseas cables, starting with failing to ratify UNCLOS to provide legal protection for them
- U.S. preservation of its role as a maritime leader depends on ratification of UNCLOS