Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) would mean a loss of sovereignty and burdensome extraterritorial regulation of U.S. extractive industries. In today’s Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens provides yet another reason to avoid ratifying the treaty, in light of the recent surge in hijackings by Somali pirates.
Article 110 of the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Convention — ratified by most nations, but not by the U.S. — enjoins naval ships from simply firing on suspected pirates. Instead, they are required first to send over a boarding party to inquire of the pirates whether they are, in fact, pirates.
Silly as this is, at least it would work in its intended purpose — when a boarding party is taken hostage and doesn’t come back! For the boarding party’s late members, however, LOST may need a provision similar to whatever honors the Star Federation accords to red-shirted Enterprise crew members.
RSS Updates 
RSS E-Mail Updates 
Twitter 
Facebook 
CEI.org 
WorkPlaceChoice.org 
GlobalWarming.org 
CEI On Demand Video 
Liberty Week Podcast 
Article 110 provides for the right of visit based on suspicion of piracy when information is insufficient to justify immediate military or police action. By contrast, Article 105 provides the right to seize pirate ships on the high seas, subject to the vessel doing the seizing being able to show adequate cause.Freedom of the seas is an important principle, and the convention provides the tools both to fight piracy on the high seas and to protect the rights of vessels operating under the law. In addition, these are the rules that President Reagan directed the US Navy to follow at the same time that he declined to sign the LOS Convention because of objections to the deep seabed mining provisions.
Thanks Caitlyn! You're post has the ring of authenticity, as opposed to the article, which sounds like cartoonish demagoguery.I guess a "full service" think tank can't afford to do as much thinking as would normally be expected.
Comments on this entry are closed.