ShareThis Page
The Law of the Sea Treaty: Sink it |

The Law of the Sea Treaty: Sink it

| Tuesday, November 30, 2004 12:00 a.m

The Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST, is an underwater version of the Kyoto treaty run by the United Nations. That is reason enough for President Bush to oppose the LOST cause before U.S. Senate ratification.

LOST transfers sovereignty from individual nations to the International Seabed Authority, a governing body of nations existing for the collective good.

No country would have more than a 12-mile territorial sea limit and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone. The ISA would control every other centimeter of ocean.

The U.S. Navy would not be allowed to sail the high seas — or blockade Cuba to prevent nuclear attack — without the blessing of France. The United States would not be allowed to drill for oil or conduct deep-sea mining without the blessing of Iran.

Companies would have to pay fees exceeding $1 million and a percentage of profits. They’d also have to share their technology so that no country would be left behind.

LOST also authorizes the taxation of anything extracted from the oceans. The seabed authority would determine the redistribution of the wealth among its members, hopefully not like the U.N.’s $20 billion oil-for-food scandal.

American courts could not settle disputes — U.N. courts or tribunals would. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan would become the new Poseidon.

Ratification means other nations will limit America’s liberty. With that sea change, all is lost.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.