[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 149 (Thursday, December 1, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: December 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
            THE LAW OF THE SEA CONVENTION ENTERS INTO FORCE

  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, on the 16th of this month, the United 
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea entered into force. The event 
passed relatively unnoticed. Nonetheless, the convention, and the 
Senate's decision on whether the United States should participate in 
the convention, will have a significant impact on our country for years 
to come.
  The arguments in support of Senate advice and consent are compelling.
  First and foremost, the convention will strengthen our national 
security. It establishes as a matter of international law, navigational 
freedoms critically important to the operation of our military forces. 
The significance of these freedoms was underscored in a letter from 
Secretary of Defense William Perry in which he stated, ``To send a 
strong signal that the United States is committed to an ocean 
regulatory regime that is guided by the rule of law, General 
Shalikashvili and I urge your support in securing early advice and 
consent to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and 
implementing Agreement.'' I ask unanimous consent that the letter 
appear in the Record immediately following my remarks.
  The United States also has significant economic interests in the 
oceans regime established by the convention. The shipping industry, and 
Americans whose jobs are dependent on ship-borne commerce, will benefit 
from the stability of the legal order on which such commerce depends. 
U.S. telecommunications companies, world leaders in advanced 
communications technologies, will benefit from the convention's 
provisions on undersea cable protection.
  Mr. President, in 1982, the Reagan administration announced that it 
was prepared to support ratification of the convention, provided that 
its concerns with the convention's provisions on deep seabed mining 
resolved. It took almost a decade and a half, but that aim was achieved 
through an agreement signed earlier this year in New York. As a result, 
both the convention and the agreement were transmitted to the Senate 
for its approval on October 7 (Treaty Doc. 103-39).
  In granting its advice and consent to the convention and agreement, 
the Senate now has the opportunity to advance a long-held, bipartisan 
foreign policy objective: The establishment of internationally 
recognized laws and norms to govern the oceans and their uses and to 
protect our rights to use the seas off our own coast and off distant 
shores throughout the world.
  We should seize this opportunity and we should seize it soon. The 
convention has entered into force. With or without the United States as 
a party, decisions will be made that will significantly affect this 
country. Virtually all of our NATO allies and most other developed 
nations have indicated their intention to ratify and are expected to 
complete their national approval processes within the next 1 to 2 
years.
  The longer the United States delays its accession to the convention, 
the less influence we will have in shaping the institutions, rules, and 
procedures under which it will operate. This would be unfortunate, 
particularly given the critical, positive contributions the United 
States has already made in achieving the agreement modifying part XI.
  Mr. President, in August the Foreign Relations Committee held a 
hearing to examine the convention and the modifying agreement (S. Hrg. 
103-737). That hearing underscored the strong support for the 
convention and its importance to the United States. I hope that in the 
104th Congress, these arguments will find resonance and that the Senate 
can proceed to fulfill its constitutionally mandated responsibilities.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                         Secretary of Defense,

                                    Washington, DC, July 29, 1994.
     Hon. Claiborne Pell,
     Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: In 1982, the United States made a 
     decision that it would not become a party to the United 
     Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea because of its 
     concerns about the deep seabed mining provisions, contained 
     in Part XI of the Convention. The Convention is due to enter 
     into force on November 16, 1994, now that the requisite 
     number of other states (60) have ratified it. However, 
     consultations were recently concluded which resulted in an 
     Agreement to correct what the United States has long viewed 
     as the Convention's flawed deep seabed mining provisions. The 
     United States now intends to sign the Agreement at the United 
     Nations on July 29, 1994. Accordingly, the Convention as 
     modified will be transmitted to the Senate for its advice and 
     consent at the end of the 103rd Congress.
       The Department of Defense fully supports U.S. signature of 
     the Agreement, and ratification of the Convention as modified 
     by the Agreement. In the Administration's view, the new 
     Agreement satisfactorily resolves the issues that the U.S. 
     Government and ocean mining interests raised in the early 
     1980's during deliberations over whether the United States 
     should sign the Law of the Sea Convention. The new Agreement 
     meets these objections by correcting the serious 
     institutional and free market deficiencies in the original 
     Convention. We have received indications from other 
     industrialized nations that, with adoption of the new 
     Agreement, they will soon accede to the modified Convention.
       The Convention establishes a universal regime for 
     governance of the oceans which is needed to safeguard U.S. 
     security and economic interests, as well as to defuse those 
     situations in which competing uses of the oceans are likely 
     to result in conflict. In addition to strongly supporting our 
     interests in freedom of navigation, the Convention provides 
     an effective framework for serious efforts to address land 
     and sea-based sources of pollution and overfishing. Moreover, 
     the Agreement provides us with an opportunity to participate 
     with other industrialized nations in a widely accepted 
     international order to regulate and safeguard the many 
     diverse activities, interests, and resources in the world's 
     oceans. Historically, this nation's security has depended 
     upon the ability to conduct military operations over, under, 
     and on the oceans. The best guarantee that this free and 
     unfettered access to the high seas will continue in the years 
     ahead is for the U.S. to become a party to the Convention, as 
     modified by the Agreement, at the earliest possible time.
       In the coming months, we anticipate heightened public 
     debate of the merits of the Law of the Sea Convention. To put 
     that debate into perspective, you will find enclosed a paper 
     which briefly outlines the history of the original 
     Convention, the steps leading to the formalization of the 
     Part XI Agreement, and the nation's vital national security 
     and other interests in becoming bound by the modified 
     Convention.
       To send a strong signal that the United States is committed 
     to an ocean regulatory regime that is guided by the rule of 
     law, General Shalikashvili and I urge your support in 
     securing early advice and consent of the United Nations 
     Convention on the Law of the Sea and implementing Agreement.
           Sincerely,
     William J. Perry.

                          ____________________