SENATE BILL: UNCLOS Treaty Ratification (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Ben

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator, and Secretary () you have 24 hours to start advocating for this (noticed I said and, not or so I want both of you ).

[Donerail]

Alrighty. Unlike over 150 other nations, we haven't ratified the Law of the Sea Convention. This would have us ratify said convention. As the head of the DoEA, the primary reason I would like to see this treaty ratified is because, without our ratification, our military (which needless to say relies heavily upon its ability to travel on and over the sea) is bound on customary rather than treaty law. Customary law can change easily and states can make unreasonable claims on maritime territory that frustrate our actions, while under treaty law they cannot. This would provide a firmer legal framework for military operations at sea.

Additionally, this offers a peaceful way to resolve disputes that could arise over maritime territory and the natural resources wherein, namely the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Such a Tribunal would help us by offering us a peaceful recourse for navigation disputes.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What are the dividing lines (miles out to see) that clarify as international waters under this act. What is the juridicitional difference for private vessels currently and how would that change once this is ratified?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

This is a treaty that is long overdue.  As the Sectetary notes, 150 other countries have ratified this treaty.  It's time we do the same.

[Donerail]

What are the dividing lines (miles out to sea) that clarify as international waters under this act. What is the juridicitional difference for private vessels currently and how would that change once this is ratified?

12 miles out and beyond would be international waters. Out to 12 nautical miles is our territorial waters where we can set law and regulate anything (ships would still have the right to innocent passage, but no fishing, polluting, military practice, or spying, and submarines have to surface, and we can suspend that right if we need to). After that there's another 12 nautical miles in which we can continue to enforce customs, taxation, immigration, and pollution laws if the infringement started or is about to start within our territory or territorial waters. There's also an Exclusive Economic Zone extending 200 miles out from our shores wherein we have sole exploitation rights of all natural resources. We also have some continental shelf rights over minerals and other resources in or attached to the continental shelf.

This would not change our current definitions of territorial waters or contiguous zone. However, it would cement in international law our exclusive right to our EEZ (which is larger than any other nation's, 3.36 million square miles (larger than the lower 48 combined)). We can also exercise the aforementioned sovereign rights over natural resources within the extended continental shelf beyond that area. By ratifying the treaty, we also allow Atlasian corporations to apply for ISA licenses (the ISA manages claims over resources in the deep seabed, an area in which no corporation has sovereign rights).

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I spent some time reviewing the objections to this treaty, but none of them were very convincing. I plan to vote in favor of this bill.

I was just coming in here to post the same thing. Most of the objections seemed to come from a place of baseless paranoia. It has also had bipartisan presidential support in the States, so I really don't see how I could dissent.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I fully intend to vote for ratification and I was honestly more than little surprised when I first discovered it hadn't already been ratified

[Franzl]

No objections.

[Donerail]

I fully intend to vote for ratification and I was honestly more than little surprised when I first discovered it hadn't already been ratified

Y'know what else hasn't been ratified? Protocols I & II to the Geneva Conventions (they're in my office, if anyone would like to...)

Thank y'all for your support.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators, this is now at final vote so please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

AYE

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE Don't See Why Not!!!!

[Franzl]

AYE

[Niemeyerite]

AYE

[Oakvale]

Aye.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Aye

[Spamage]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Final Passage of the Resolution of Senate Consent to Ratify the Treaty between the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Republic of Atlasia:

Aye (9): Averroës Nix, Ben, Franzl, HagridOfTheDeep, jdb, JulioMadrid, NC Yankee, Oakvale and Spamage
Nay (0):
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (0):
Vacant Seats (1): Roy Barnes 2010

The Resolution Giving Senate Consent to Ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty has been been adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.