[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 128 (Monday, July 30, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5458-S5459]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 SENATE RESOLUTION 598--CALLING UPON THE UNITED STATES SENATE TO GIVE 
   ITS ADVICE AND CONSENT TO THE RATIFICATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS 
                    CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA

  Ms. HIRONO (for herself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                              S. Res. 598

       Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 
     (UNCLOS) was adopted by Third United Nations Conference on 
     the Law of the Sea in December 1982, and entered into force 
     in November 1994 to establish a treaty regime to govern 
     activities on, over, and under the world's oceans;
       Whereas UNCLOS builds on four 1958 law of the sea 
     conventions to which the United States is a party, including 
     the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous 
     Zone, the Convention on the High Seas, the Convention on the 
     Continental Shelf, and the Convention on Fishing and 
     Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas;
       Whereas the treaty and an associated 1994 agreement 
     relating to implementation of the treaty were transmitted to 
     the Senate on October 6, 1994, and, in the absence of Senate 
     advice and consent to adherence, the United States is not a 
     party to the convention and the associated 1994 agreement;
       Whereas the convention has been ratified by 167 parties, 
     which includes 166 states and the European Union, but not the 
     United States;
       Whereas the United States, like most other countries, 
     believes that coastal states under UNCLOS have the right to 
     regulate economic activities in their Exclusive Economic 
     Zones (EEZs), but do not have the right to regulate foreign 
     military activities in their EEZs;
       Whereas the treaty's provisions relating to navigational 
     rights, including those in EEZs, reflect the United States 
     diplomatic position on the issue dating back to UNCLOS's 
     adoption in 1982;
       Whereas becoming a party to the treaty would reinforce the 
     United States perspective into permanent international law;
       Whereas becoming a party to the treaty would give the 
     United States standing to participate in discussions relating 
     to the treaty and thereby improve the United States ability 
     to intervene as a full party to disputes relating to 
     navigational rights, and to defend United States 
     interpretations of the treaty's provisions, including those 
     relating to whether coastal states have a right under UNCLOS 
     to regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs;
       Whereas relying on customary international norms to defend 
     United States interests in these issues is not sufficient, 
     because it is not universally accepted and is subject to 
     change over time based on state practice;
       Whereas relying on other nations to assert claims on behalf 
     of the United States at the Hague Convention is woefully 
     insufficient to defend and uphold United States sovereign 
     rights and interests;
       Whereas the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in their July 
     12, 2016, ruling on the case In the Matter of the South China 
     Sea Arbitration, stated that ``the Tribunal forwarded to the 
     Parties for their comment a Note Verbale from the Embassy of 
     the United States of America, requesting to send a 
     representative to observe the hearing'' and ``the Tribunal 
     communicated to the Parties and the U.S. Embassy that it had 
     decided that `only interested States parties to the United 
     Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea will be admitted as 
     observers' and thus could not accede to the U.S. request'';
       Whereas the past Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral 
     Jonathan Greenert, stated ``as a party to UNCLOS, we will be 
     in a better position to counter the efforts of coastal 
     nations to restrict freedom of the seas'' on February 16, 
     2012, before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
       Whereas the Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Ray Mabus, 
     stated that ``the UNCLOS treaty guarantees rights such as 
     innocent passage through territorial seas; transit passage 
     through, under and over international straits; and the laying 
     and maintaining of submarine cables,'' and that ``the 
     convention has been approved by nearly every maritime power 
     and all the permanent members of the UN Security Council, 
     except the United States'' on February 16, 2012, before the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
       Whereas the Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Ray Mabus, 
     further stated that ``[o]ur notable absence as a signatory 
     weakens our position with other nations, allowing the 
     introduction of expansive definitions of sovereignty on the 
     high seas that undermine our ability to defend our mineral 
     rights along our own continental shelf and in the Arctic,'' 
     and that ``the Department strongly supports the accession to 
     UNCLOS, an action consistently recommended by my predecessors 
     of both parties'' on February 16, 2012, before the Committee 
     on Armed Services of the Senate;
       Whereas the President and the Chief Executive Officer of 
     the United States Chamber of Commerce, Thomas J. Donahue, 
     stated that the Chamber ``supports joining the Convention 
     because it is in our national interest--both in our national 
     security and our economic interests,'' that ``becoming a 
     party to the Treaty benefits the U.S. economically by 
     providing American companies the legal certainty and 
     stability they need to hire and invest,'' and that 
     ``companies will be hesitant to take on the investment risk 
     and cost to explore and develop the resources of the sea--
     particularly on the extended continental shelf (ECS)--without 
     the legal certainty and stability accession to LOS provides'' 
     on June 28, 2012, before the Committee on Foreign Relations 
     of the Senate;
       Whereas Mr. Donahue further stated that ``the benefits of 
     joining cut across many important industries including 
     telecommunications, mining, shipping, and oil and natural 
     gas,'' and ``joining the Convention will provide the U.S. a 
     critical voice on maritime issues--from mineral claims in the 
     Arctic to how International Seabed Authority (ISA) funds are 
     distributed'' on June 28, 2012, before the Committee on 
     Foreign Relations of the Senate;
       Whereas the past Commander of United States Pacific 
     Command, Admiral Samuel J. Locklear, stated that UNCLOS is 
     ``widely accepted after a lot of years of deliberation by 
     many, many countries, most countries in my Area of 
     Responsibility (AOR)'' and that ``when we're not a signatory, 
     it reduces our overall credibility when we bring it up as a 
     choice of how you might solve a dispute of any kind'' on 
     April 16, 2015, before the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     Senate;
       Whereas the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, 
     Admiral Paul Zukunft, stated on February 12, 2016, that 
     ``[w]ith the receding of the icepack, the Arctic Ocean has 
     become the focus of international interest,'' that ``[a]ll 
     Arctic states agree that the Law of the Sea Convention is the 
     governing legal regime for the Arctic Ocean . . . yet, we 
     remain the only Arctic nation that has not ratified the very 
     instrument that provides this accepted legal framework 
     governing the Arctic Ocean and its seabed,'' and that 
     ``[r]atification of the Law of the Sea Convention supports 
     our economic interests, environmental protection, and safety 
     of life at sea, especially in the Arctic Ocean'';
       Whereas former Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jonathan 
     Greenert, further stated that ``remaining outside Law of the 
     Sea Convention (LOSC) is inconsistent with our principles, 
     our national security strategy and our leadership in commerce 
     and trade'' and that ``virtually every major ally of the U.S. 
     is a party to LOSC, as are all other permanent members of the 
     U.N. Security Council and all other Arctic nations'' on June 
     14, 2012, before the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     Senate;
       Whereas Admiral Greenert further stated that ``our absence 
     [from LOSC] could provide an excuse for nations to 
     selectively choose among Convention provisions or abandon it 
     altogether, thereby eroding the navigational freedoms we 
     enjoy today'' and that ``accession would enhance multilateral 
     operations with our partners and demonstrate a clear 
     commitment to the rule of law for the oceans'' on June 14, 
     2012, before the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
       Whereas the United States Special Representative of State 
     for the Arctic and former Commandant of the Coast Guard, 
     Admiral Robert Papp, Jr., stated that ``as a non-party to the 
     Law of the Sea Convention, the U.S. is at a significant 
     disadvantage relative to the other Arctic Ocean coastal 
     States,'' that ``those States are parties to the Convention, 
     and are well along the path to obtaining legal certainty and 
     international recognition of their Arctic extended 
     continental shelf,'' and that ``becoming a Party to the Law 
     of the Sea Convention would allow the United States to fully 
     secure its rights to the continental shelf off the coast of 
     Alaska, which is likely to extend out to more than 600 
     nautical miles'' on December 10, 2014, before the 
     Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and Emerging Threats of the 
     Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives;
       Whereas the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, General 
     Joseph F. Dunford, stated that ``[t]he Convention provides 
     legal certainty in the world's largest maneuver space,'' that 
     ``access would strengthen the legal foundation for our 
     ability to transit through international straits and 
     archipelagic waters; preserve our right to

[[Page S5459]]

     conduct military activities in other countries' Exclusive 
     Economic Zones (EEZs) without notice or permission; reaffirm 
     the sovereign immunity of warships; provide a framework to 
     counter excessive maritime claims; and preserve or operations 
     and intelligence-collection activities,'' and that ``joining 
     the Convention would also demonstrate our commitment to the 
     rule of law, strengthen our credibility among those nations 
     that are already party to the Convention, and allow us to 
     bring the full force of our influence in challenging 
     excessive maritime claims'' on July 9, 2015, before the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
       Whereas Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff General 
     Dunford further stated that ``by remaining outside the 
     Convention, the United States remains in scarce company with 
     Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Syria'' and that ``by 
     failing to join the Convention, some countries may come to 
     doubt our commitment to act in accordance with international 
     law'' on July 9, 2015, before the Committee on Armed Services 
     of the Senate;
       Whereas the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John M. 
     Richardson, stated that ``acceding to the Convention would 
     strengthen our credibility and strategic position'' and that 
     ``we undermine our leverage by not signing up to the same 
     rule book by which we are asking other countries to accept'' 
     on July 30, 2015, before the Committee on Armed Services of 
     the Senate;
       Whereas Admiral Richardson further stated that ``becoming a 
     part of [UNCLOS] would give us a great deal of credibility, 
     and particularly as it pertains to the unfolding 
     opportunities in the Arctic'' and that ``this provides a 
     framework to adjudicate disputes'' on July 30, 2015, before 
     the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
       Whereas the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and 
     Pacific Security Affairs, the Honorable David Shear, stated 
     that ``while the United States operates consistent with the 
     United Nations convention on the law of the sea, we've seen 
     positive momentum in promoting shared rules of the road'' and 
     that ``our efforts would be greatly strengthened by Senate 
     ratification of UNCLOS'' on September 17, 2015, before the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
       Whereas the Commander of the United States Pacific Command, 
     Admiral Harry B. Harris, stated that ``all maritime claims 
     must be derived from land features in accordance with 
     international law as reflected in the Law of the Sea 
     Convention, and any disputes should be settled peacefully and 
     in accordance with international law'' and that ``our efforts 
     would be greatly strengthened by Senate ratification of 
     UNCLOS'' on September 17, 2015, before the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the Senate;
       Whereas Admiral Harris further stated that ``I think that 
     by not signing onto it that we lose the creditability for the 
     very same thing that we're arguing for . . . which is the 
     following--accepting rules and norms in the international 
     arena. The United States is a beacon--we're a beacon on a 
     hill but I think that light is brighter if we sign on to 
     UNCLOS'' on February 23, 2016, at a hearing before the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and
       Whereas former Commander of United States Pacific Command, 
     retired Admiral Dennis Blair, stated that ``if we want to 
     focus on the Asia-Pacific going forward, we're going to have 
     to find a way to pass the Law of the Sea because it does hurt 
     us and it is striking to us that the Chinese have signed and 
     they're obligated but don't want to do it,'' and that ``we 
     have not signed but want them to do it, right? So it's 
     ironical to many in the region'' on July 13, 2016, before the 
     Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific, and International 
     Cyber Security of the Committee on Foreign Services of the 
     Senate: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the Senate--
       (1) affirms that it is in the national interest for the 
     United States to become a formal signatory of the United 
     Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea;
       (2) urges the Senate to give its advice and consent to the 
     ratification of the United Nations Convention of the Law of 
     the Sea (UNCLOS); and
       (3) recommends the ratification of UNCLOS remain a top 
     priority for the administration, having received bipartisan 
     support from every President since 1994, and having most 
     recently been underscored by the strategic challenges the 
     United States faces in the Asia-Pacific region and more 
     specifically in the South China Sea.

                          ____________________