Numerous presidential commissions across different administrations have found that on balance ratification of UNCLOS would be beneficial to U.S. security
The 1982 LOS Convention sets out a carefully-drafted balance between safety, security and stewardship in the maritime domain. It is not a perfect treaty (is there such a thing?), but on balance, it is a very good treaty for the United States. The audience need not take my word for that. The first recommendation to come out of the bipartisan blue ribbon U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, chaired by former chief of naval operations and secretary of energy James Watkins, was a recommendation that the United States accede to the 1982 Convention.13 Similarly, former secretary of defense and CIA director Leon Panetta supported accession in his capacity as chairman of the prestigious Pew Ocean Commission.14 Following a decade-long debate over the Convention's strengths and weaknesses, Canada-our Arctic neighbor and fellow member of NATO and the Arctic Council-ratified the Convention in 2003.15
Quicktabs: Evidence
Arguments
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
-
A broad, bipartisan consensus supports U.S. ratification of the Law of the Sea Convention, and has consistently argued on its behalf for the past 30 years. This coalition includes high-level officials from the past six administrations and backing by all Presidents since Clinton. It also includes a range of senior defense officials including every Chief of Naval Operations.
Related Quotes:- Broad consensus of groups with maritime interests support ratification of UNCLOS
- Overwhelming consensus of experts and officials is in favor of ratifying convention
- Multiple U.S. administrations have continually supported ratification of UNCLOS to preserve freedom of navigation
- Successive commissions have argued strongly for US ratification of UNCLOS
- ... and 23 more quote(s)