US non-party status to UNCLOS undermines is global leadership and complicates efforts to challenge excessive claims through its FON program
The US is, of course, the world's sole superpower and its pre-eminent maritime power. Accordingly, the US clearly plays a leading role in global affairs. The US also perceives itself to be a world leader and is keen to project and promote this image and reality. The fact that the US is not a party to the Convention undermines that leadership role in the maritime sphere. Critically, when the United States comments on maritime issues of concern to it, such as regarding excessive maritime claims through the FON program or on the South China Sea disputes for instance, a frequently raised objection to Washington's interventions is that the US has not signed up to UNCLOS. This serves to compromise the credibility and authority of the US in global ocean affairs. US accession would therefore remove a somewhat irrelevant, but far from unimportant barrier to the United States playing a strong leadership role as the contemporary law of the sea. The counterpoint here is that by choosing not to participate the US is abdicating or at least undermining its credential to a leadership role in international ocean affairs. The rationale for ratification on this front alone is therefore, it is submitted, persuasive.
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
- Coastal states are increasingly challenging US freedom of navigation rights as it remains outside of the UNCLOS framework
- U.S. dealing with over 100 threats to our navigational freedoms that could be resolved under UNCLOS
- Currently, over 100 excessive and illegal claims threaten U.S. FON
- Over a hundred excessive claims currently, some of which are directly complicating counter narcotics operations
- ... and 9 more quote(s)
U.S. failure to ratify UNCLOS raises fundamental questions regarding not only the future of legal regimes applicable to the world’s oceans, but also U.S. leadership in promoting international law and order.
Additionally, our partners lose confidence in the ability of the United States to make good on its word when we negotiate and sign treaties but don’t ultimately become party to them, especially as in the case of UNCLOS where the U.S. negotiated aggressively to win valuable concessions and won them.Related Quotes:
- US failure to ratify UNCLOS is impeding the international cooperation necessary to address multinational threats like terrorism
- U.S. rejection of international agreements like UNCLOS only emboldens our adversaries to challenge our leadership
- US being excluded from international maritime policy￼ because it has failed to ratify UNCLOS
- US credibility and legitimacy suffers when it pushes for treaties like UNCLOS but then declines to ratify them
- ... and 22 more quote(s)