Obamas International Social Justice at the Expense of You184557

Law Of The Sea Treaty Ratification CALL 202-224-3121 TODAY and DEMAND CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS TO STOP THE DISMANTLING OF AMERICA In recent times, leading U.S. cupboard officers have traveled around the globe on high profile diplomatic missions. Ironically, in the procedure of Secretary of State Hillary Clintons go to to the Arctic Circle and Secretary of Protection Leon Panettas travels in Asia, they each undercut the situation for the United Nations controversial Law of the Sea Treaty Dropped  a situation they had jointly produced prior to departing in testimony prior to the Senate Overseas Relations Committee. Mrs. Clinton took component in a meeting of the Arctic Council, whose 8 members have territory in that region. Of these, just 5  Russia, Canada, Norway, Denmarks Greenland and the United states   really have coasts around the Arctic Ocean, and therefore are able to claim rights to the resources offshore. To be certain, the secretary of State used the occasion of her becoming a member of the other Arctic nations for the objective of forging a brand new region wide search and rescue SandR agreement to express the Obama administrations commitment to Misplaced. She assured her colleagues that the president is determined to overcome opposition within the Senate and the country in order to get the treaty ratified. Nevertheless, this SandR agreement suggests the most obvious: It is far easier to achieve understandings inside a group of 8  or, in addition to this, five   nations that have similar, if not identical, interests and a shared understanding of the stakes, than among a group of 150 plus nations, most of whom do not. If that is true for an accord governing assistance to downed planes and ships Lost at sea, it surely is the situation when it comes towards the disposition of potentially many trillions of dollars worth of undersea gas and oil deposits. Meanwhile, our Defense secretary was off in Asia trying to shore up Americas alliances in the region without actually saying that China is a threat that needs to become countered there. So he eschewed the presidents much touted strategic pivot through the Middle East and South Asia towards the South China Sea  supposedly involving a move in force to parry the PRCs aspirations for hegemony. Instead, Mr. Panetta employed less offensive terms like rebalancing and produced commitments about a future U.S. presence within the theater that were deeply discounted considering ongoing, and approaching, sharp cuts in protection spending. It happens that Secretary Panettas enthusiasm for that Law of the Sea Treaty tracks with Team Obamas public efforts to low ball the risks caused from Chinas increasingly aggressive behavior toward our Asian friends and allies, and its growing ability to act coercively due to its growing military capabilities. Panetta and, surprisingly, even senior Navy and other military officers who should know better seem to think that if only the us were a party to Dropped, international law would tame the Chinese dragon. As one of the nations most astute China hands, Gordon Chang, noted recently in his column at World Affairs Journal: Although Beijing ratified the [LOST] pact in June 1996, it continues to issue maps claiming the entire South China Sea. That claim is, among other things, incompatible with all the treatys rules. Its no wonder Beijing notified the U.N. in 2006 that it would not accept international arbitration of its sovereignty claims. Just as common sense argues for using bilateral or, at most, five party forums to establish arrangements governing the Arctic Oceans resources, it strongly militates against the united states allowing itself to be bound to a treaty whose core provisions i.e., those governing limitations on territorial claims and mandatory dispute resolutions are already being serially violated by Communist China. On May 9, Secretary Panetta nonetheless asserted that By moving away from the sidelines, by sitting at the table of nations that have acceded to this treaty, we can defend our interests, we can lead the discussions, we will be able to influence those treaty bodies that develop and interpret the Law of the Sea. That is not really so if, as is true from the LOSTs various institutions, we would have but one seat among many, and no certainty that we can decisively influence bodies that develop and interpret the Law of the sea. In fact, thanks towards the rigged game nature of these institutions, such bodies can be relied upon to hamstring us  by, for example, applying environmental regulations over which we have no control to our Navys anti submarine warfare exercises and our domestic emissions into inland air and water that migrates to the international oceans. Meanwhile, the Chinese will get away with choosing which rules they may abide by and which they wont. Mr. Chang puts it this way: China is. . . a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but remains a notorious nuclear proliferator, and it is a member from the Globe Trade Organization, yet brazenly disregards its trade obligations. And U.N. sanctions? China openly violates those too, even though it is one from the 5 permanent members of the Security Council. In short, the Current wants senators to suspend common sense and ignore real and legitimate concerns about the deleterious impact of the law of the sea treaty congress on our sovereignty, economic interests and potentially even the national security. Will 34 Senators have enough common sense to just say No?    CALL 202-224-3121 TODAY and  DEMAND CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS TO STOP THE DISMANTLING OF AMERICA