Law of the Sea (Complete)[1]

8/14/2019 Law of the Sea (Complete)[1]

1/33

LMDIT 2008 LOS Updates

LOSUniqueness: Wont Pass...3-4Uniqueness: Will Pass.5Bush Supports LOS.6LOS Good: Territory...7LOS Good: Heg...8LOS Good: Energy Sources.9LOS Good: Armed Conflict...10LOS Good: Ecosystem...11LOS Good: Terrorism12LOS Good: Oil...13LOS Amazing14Brink Now..15LOS Bad China..16LOS Bad Heg.17LOS Bad Ineffective..18LOS Bad Terrorism19LOS Terrible..20LOS Bad: Russia Disad21-23LOS Bad: Russia Disad Extensions.24-25Tensions.26

No Tensions..27-29US in Arctic...30Canada in Arctic31Canada32Random..33

LARS OF THE SEA

1


2/33


Uniqueness: Wont Pass

LOS wont pass now and faces opposition from conservativesKralev, 08 [ Nicholas, May 13 2008, The Washington Times, U.S. pursues Arctic claim; Spending millions on research, but hasnot OK'd Law of Sea treaty]

The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea has long divided U.S. conservatives .About 155 nations have ratified the pact, and the treaty enjoys strong support from theU.S. military, as well as leading business, legal and environmental lobbies. But intenseopposition from conservative groups who fear the pact infringes on U.S. sovereigntyhas defeated a number of ratification drives in the Senate. The Bush administrationhas disputes with its fellow Republicans in Congress as well. Its hands are tied when itcomes to making any claims to the U.N. commission until the Senate ratifies the Law of the Sea accord. Ms. McMurray said the issue has become "very partisan" and,"looking at the calendar" with a shortened congressional session because of thepresidential election, Senate ratification this year is a very long shot.

Despite Bushes claims, Republicans will block LOS from PassingSands, February 18

2


3/33


The Bush administration has called on the Senate to ratify the treaty, which theSenate Foreign Relations Committee passed last year. But a handful of Republican lawmakers have vowed to block it from passing the full Senate, saying it would undermine US sovereignty.

LOS wont pass. Encoraches on American Sovereignty.The Gazette, February 29

The U.S. has consistently rejected Canada's claim of right of control over the NorthwestPassage. It has also refused to ratify the United Nations Law of the Sea becausethe Senate views the treaty as an encroachment on American sovereignty. Borgerson said the American government's status outside the treaty restricts itsability to assert its own territorial claims off the Alaskan coast. He also asserted thatthe U.S. needs, as a first step, to strike an accord with Canada on regulating vessel and tanker traffic in the north .

Uniqueness: Wont Pass

LOS faces opposition from conservative groupsThe Washington Times , May 13, 20 08 Tuesday, U.S. pursues Arctic claim; Spendingmillions on research, but has not OK'd Law of Sea treaty, By Nicholas Kralev, THEWASHINGTON TIMES, WORLD; BRIEFING: THE AMERICAS; A15

To file a claim, however, a country must be a party to the Law of the Sea treaty, and the UnitedStates is not. President Clinton signed the treaty in 1994, and President Bush supportsratification, but fierce conservative opposition to the U.N. pact has blocked Senate approval,where a two-thirds majority is needed. The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea haslong divided U.S. conservatives. About 155 nations have ratified the pact, and the treaty enjoysstrong support from the U.S. military, as well as leading business, legal and environmentallobbies. But intense opposition from conservative groups who fear the pactinfringes on U.S. sovereignty has defeated a number of ratification drivesin the Senate. One-time Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, made a point of his opposition to the treaty during his campaign. PresumptiveRepublican nominee Sen. John McCain supported the pact in the past, but has recentlysuggested he would seek changes in the treaty.

3


4/33


Uniqueness: Will Pass

LOS will pass nowhttp://www. thewashingtonnote .com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/ Reid and Biden: Law of the Sea is There for the Taking May 02 2008

The quiet strategy did achieve something over the past few months: I can confirm thatthere are more than enough senators in favor of U.S. accession to the Law of the Seaconvention to get it through . Now it's up to Senators Reid and Biden to finish the job.

LOS GOOD and Will PassSands, February 18

New Findings will allow Us to claim more oil and natural resources New sea-floor maps of the Arctic Ocean could help the US claim more oil and natural gas in the region,scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced last week.Although the Senate has not yet ratified the international treaty that would allowthe US to claim the territory, the new maps could lay the groundwork for such a

4
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/http://globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/united_states_and_law_sea_time_joinhttp://reid.senate.gov/http://biden.senate.gov/http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/05/reid_and_biden/http://globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/united_states_and_law_sea_time_joinhttp://reid.senate.gov/http://biden.senate.gov/


5/33


bid, the NOAA scientists said. International law allows any country to lay claim to territory up to200 miles from its coast. But NOAA's new maps, which are based on an expedition that theagency mounted last summer, show that the continental slope extends 100 miles further than theUS previously believed. Mayer said the new maps could help the US to meet thecriteria of the Law of the Sea Treaty, which governs the ownership of oceanresources including undersea oil and gas deposits. More than 155 countries haveratified the treaty to date, and Russia, Denmark and Canada have used it bolster their claims tooil and gas in the Arctic region. The US has not yet ratified the pact.

Bush Supports LOS

Bush strongly supports passage of LOSThe Washington Times Sea treaty sparks rivalries; Senate fight looms amid race to

North PoleBy David R. Sands, THE WASHINGTON TIMES November 12, 2007 Some 155 nations have ratified the treaty since it was signed in 1982. President Reagan refused to sign the

pact, objecting to provisions for the international regulation of deep-sea mining. President Clinton sent anamended version of the treaty to the Senate in 1994, but it repeatedly has failed to win approval, mostrecently in 2004. Opponents of the U.N .- backed accord vow to defeat the treaty yet againthis year, despite strong backing from President Bush, all the U.S. military services,the American Bar Association and leading business and environmental lobbies.

Bush Strongly supports LOS and it will increase US national securityinterestshttp://www. globalsolutions.org /in_the_beltway/debating_law_sea April 25 2008

Let me begin with the words of President Bush , a man who I rarely quote, who said lastMay that, Joining will serve the national security interests of the United States,including the maritime mobility of our armed forces worldwide. It will secure U.S.sovereign rights over extensive marine areas, including the valuable natural

5
http://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/debating_law_seahttp://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/debating_law_seahttp://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/debating_law_seahttp://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/debating_law_seahttp://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/debating_law_seahttp://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/debating_law_seahttp://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/debating_law_sea


6/33


resources they contain. Accession will promote U.S. interests in the environmentalhealth of the oceans . And it will give the United States a seat at the table when the rightsthat are vital to our interests are debated and interpreted.

LOS GOOD: Territory

LOS Good, allows us to take territory in the arcticKralev, 08 [ Nicholas, May 13 2008, The Washington Times, U.S. pursues Arctic claim; Spending millions on research, but hasnot OK'd Law of Sea treaty]

"We have $5.6 million in the 2008 budget to assemble both the hardware andscientific expertise to do this investigation ," Ms. McMurray said. "We started a little bitlater than other countries, but we have a big coastline, and there are some promisingopportunities." Russia's planting of its flag on the Arctic seafloor in August angered other countries, but experts say the only legal way to make a claim is through the U.N.Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf. "Planting flags on the seafloor accomplishes nothing except for feeding the various nationalist beasts that seem tohunger for a return to the 18th century," said Bernard Coakley, professor at the Universityof Alaska's Geophysical Institute. To file a claim , however, a country must be a partyto the Law of the Sea treaty, and the United States is not . President Clinton signed thetreaty in 1994, and President Bush supports ratification, but fierce conservativeopposition to the U.N. pact has blocked Senate approval, where a two-thirds majority isneeded.

6


7/33


LOS GOOD: Heg

The LOS will increase US military influence. Increases HEGThe Washington TimesSea treaty sparks rivalries; Senate fight looms amid race to North Pole By David R.

Sands, THE WASHINGTON TIMESNovember 12, 2007

Treaty supporters, including such conservative legal experts as University of Virginia law professor John Norton Moore, argue the U.S. was the big winner in the Law of the Sea negotiations.The U.S. will have a vast exclusive economic zone because of its extensive coastline.U.S. firms will readily exploit the oceans' mineral and energy wealth with clearproperty rights in place. U.S. military vessels can carry on their global duties whileexempt from the treaty's commercial restrictions.

Treaty opponents counter with one big idea - a deep distrust of the United Nations - and a host of objectionsto specific provisions that they say will hamstring the U.S. military and subject U.S. corporations to anunfriendly, unelected global bureaucracy.If the treaty drafters had stuck to the original, modest mandate on navigation, "this treaty would have sailedthrough," according to Heritage Foundation analyst Baker Spring.

7


8/33


LOS GOOD: Energy Sources

LOS will pass and is good: Energy sources.Sands, February 18

The US oil and gas industry has urged the Senate to ratify the Law of the SeaTreaty. Paul Kelly, the industry's main lobbyist on the the issue , told Platts that oil andgas companies have long pushed for ratification so the US can move forward with asubmission claiming territory along its extended continental shelf. Kelly, whorepresents the American Petroleum Institute and other trade groups, told aSenate committee in November that not ratifying the treaty could hurt US energyinterests. "The US petroleum industry is concerned that failure by the UnitedStates [to ratify the treaty] could adversely affect US companies' operationsoffshore other countries, and negatively affect any opportunity to lay claim to

vitally needed natural resources," Kelly said.

8


9/33


LOS GOOD: Armed Conflict

LOS is key to deter armed conflictThe Gazette, February 29

"There are currently no clear rules governing this economically and strategicallyvital region," stated the magazine's summary of Borgerson's analysis, called Arctic Meltdown:The Economic and Security Implications of Global Warming. "Unless Washington leads theway toward a multilateral diplomatic solution, the Arctic could descend into armedconflict." Borgerson noted Russia's increasing assertiveness in claimingsovereignty of huge swaths of the region off its coast.

LOS key to check other countriesNewsday, March 10 But this 1982 treaty actually confirms U.S. sovereignty over ocean resources across an arealarger than the Louisiana Purchase or the Alaska Purchase. The roster of those who urge thatour nation join the convention includes top current military leaders, who see it asenhancing national security, as well as President George W. Bush. The UnitedStates was a leader in negotiating the treaty to begin with. And when President Ronald Reaganraised objections to its provisions about deep seabed mining, our nation was able to get that part

9


10/33


11/33


LOS GOOD: Terrorism

LOS GOOD: TerrorismKelly, P ., World Oil, The Convention on the Law of the Sea: Why the critics are wrong, April 1,

20 08

Initially, the United States had been reluctant to join the convention, fearing that its maritimeactivities would be restricted. However , President George W. Bush in May requestedthe Senate to support ratification of the convention, and the Senate ForeignRelations Committee approved ratification of the convention in October. Onereason for the policy shift is that the United States has become increasinglyconcerned about the spread of terrorist activities and weapons of mass destructionthrough maritime channels, especially since the so-called war on terrorism became the nation'stop priority in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks . Clearly, Washington realizesit cannot ensure maritime security on its own and that it would be more beneficialto seek other nations' involvement. The United States' shift toward ratifying UNCLOS,which it had virtually ignored for more than two decades, also stems at least in part from a belief that adherence would help expand the PSI regime.

11


12/33


LOS GOOD: OILLOS GOOD: OILKelly, P ., World Oil, The Convention on the Law of the Sea: Why the critics are wrong, April 1,20 08

Recognizing the importance of the Law of the Sea (LOS) Convention to theenergy sector, the National Petroleum Council, an advisory body to the US Secretary of Energy, in 1973 published an assessment of industry needs in an effort to influence thenegotiations. Entitled Law of the Sea : Particular aspects affecting the petroleumindustry, itcontained conclusions and recommendations in five key areasincluding freedom of navigation, stable investment conditions, protectionof the marine environment, accommodation of multiple uses, and disputesettlement. The views reflected in this study had a substantial impacton the negotiations, andmost of its recommendations found their way into the Convention in one form or another. Havingbeen satisfied with the terms of the Convention, all of theUS oil and gas industrys major tradeassociations have for many years supported ratification of the Convention by the US. Also, theOuter Continental Shelf Policy Committee, an advisory body to the US Secretary of the Interior onmatters relating to offshore oil and gas leasing program, has adopted resolutions supporting USaccession to the Convention.The Convention is important to our industrys efforts to develop offshore oiland gas supply worldwide . It secures each coastal nations exclusive rights to the livingand non-living resources of the 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). It would bring anadditional 4.1 million square miles of ocean under US jurisdiction. This EEZ isan area larger than the US land area. The Convention also broadens the definitionof the continental shelf in a way that favors the US, with itsbroad

12


13/33


continental margins, particularly in the North Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, theBering Sea and the Arctic Ocean.

LOS good: Oil, natural gas, and navigational freedom

Aerospace Daily & Defense Report , May 2, 20 08 Friday, USCG commandant pushes for U.S.to sign Law of Sea Treaty , Bettina H. Chavanne , News; Pg. 5 Vol. 226 No. 24Citing recent Russian claims of Arctic seabed sovereignty, the U.S. Coast Guardcommandant is urging Congress to ratify the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty. Adm. ThadAllen believes successful management of the waters and resources in the Arcticwould best be achieved by adhering to the international agreement , which washammered out around the early 1980s. The treaty also would help manage ship traffic inthe Bering Strait, which the four-star admiral says ?could be the next big choke point.Aswaters warm, fish stocks are migrating, and that introduces the need for a conservationmanagement plan, Allen added. Moreover, the region is rich in natural gas and oilreserves, which spurs Russian interests as much as it does in the United States andelsewhere. Test deployment The Bush administration?s fiscal 2009 budget request asksCongress for nearly $5 million to fund the treaty?s International Seabed Authority, aswell as the international tribunal that the treaty established. The Navy Department,which includes the Marine Corps, also supports U.S. accession to the treaty and the Navysecretary, chief of naval operations and the Marine commandant all have testified to thateffect again this year. In particular, the treaty codifies important principles of customary international law, such as freedom of navigation and rights of passage.

LOS AMAZING!!!!National Security Network http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/608 Report 31 October2007 The U.S. has a compelling national interest to ratify convention. As Deputy Secretary of State John

Negroponte and Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England explain, The United States has acompelling national interest in a stable international legal regime for the oceans .Retired Admiral and former Chief of Naval Operations Vern Clark and Ambassador Thomas Pickeringexplain that the convention , would enable our armed forces to defend us at home andabroad with legal certainty, and would vastly increase our sovereign rights off thecoasts of the United States . The U.S. military needs this convention to fightterrorism and better confront global challenges. The convention strengthens the right of navigation by sea and by air, meaning that the U.S. Navy will not need to ask each country for apermission slip each time it passes by another country. Importantly the convention allows the U.S. to

board private vessels on the high seas, which would allow the U.S. and its allies to more effectively combatillicit smuggling. As Negroponte and England explain, This is a critical time for America and our friends

and allies -- faced with a wider and more complex array of global and transnational security challenges thanever before. Effectively meeting those challenges requires unimpeded maritime mobility -- the ability of our forces to respond any time, anywhere, if so required. The U.S. Coast Guard also wants the conventionratified, because it would greatly expand U.S. territorial sovereignty from three milesoff the coast to twelve miles. This would empower the Coast Guard to better protectthe homeland and monitor U.S. costal waters . U.S. businesses want the conventionratified, because it will be the greatest expansion of resource jurisdiction in U.S.history. The convention grants sovereign coastal nations the right of an exclusive economic zone thatextends sovereign authority out to sea by 200 nautical miles. The United States will gain considerably,

13
http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/608http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/608http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/608


14/33


as our economic zone may extend out to as much as 600 miles because of the Arctic shelf. AsEagleburger and Moore note this would represent, the greatest expansion of resource jurisdiction in U.S.history, greater in area than that of the Louisiana Purchase and the acquisition of Alaska combined. Thiswould be a huge boon to U.S. companies that work in oil, gas, and minerals, such asnickel, copper, and cobalt . The convention is good for the environment. Apart from the substantialsecurity and economic benefits, the convention is also a win for the environment . The Law of the Seaconvention enables sovereign states to better regulate fishing stocks and oceanpollution. Spencer Boyer explains that, All parties to the treaty must cooperate in marine conservationefforts through monitoring, technical assistance, and other measures. Furthermore, the treaty promotes and

protects scientific research.

BRINK NOW

Bush needs to pass now in order to maintain US HegSands, February 18 Other countries are already moving to make their claims. Russia made world-wideheadlines in the summer of 2007 when it sent an submarine to plant a Russian flag onthe sea floor at the North Pole. Canada as well as Greenland, through Denmark,have also expressed interest in Arctic oil and gas. Kelly said NOAA's new mapscould help the US dispute the claims that have been made by Russia andCanada. But the US would be at a disadvantage at this point, because it has notyet ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty, Kelly said.

Brink is now: Oil reservesThe Washington Times , May 13, 20 08 Tuesday, U.S. pursues Arctic claim; Spendingmillions on research, but has not OK'd Law of Sea treaty, By Nicholas Kralev, THEWASHINGTON TIMES, WORLD; BRIEFING: THE AMERICAS; A15

14


15/33


Sen. Lisa Murkowski , Alaska Republican and supporter of the treaty , warned last weekthe United States stands to lose billions of barrels of oil in the Arctic if itremains outside the Law of the Sea accord."I can tell you, if we're not willing to claim it, if we don't step up to claim it,others will," she said in a speech on the Senate floor.Ms. McMurray said the Bush administration is "working very hard, from the president down," onsupporting research, and there will have to be "a continuous contribution to this effort" in the nextseveral years. First breakthrough The effects of climate change on the Arctic is the topic of theannual Arctic Forum, which began yesterday in Washington and is organized by Arctic ResearchConsortium of the United States .

LOS BAD: China

Under LOS, China will gain more area and a bigger economic zoneXinhua June 8China's marine economy had been soaring annually at more than 20 per cent since the1980s and the total output reached 2.5 trillion yuan (359 billion US dollars) last year, 266times more than that of 1979.China's mainland coastline is about 18,000 kilometres long . Under the UNConvention on the Law of the Sea, China boasts about 350,000 square kilometres of coastal and inland water areas, and the area of China's exclusive economic zone is about3 million square kilometres.

15


16/33


LOS BAD: Heg

LOS limits US authority. Decreases HEGThe Washington Times Sea treaty sparks rivalries; Senate fight looms amid race to

North PoleBy David R. Sands, THE WASHINGTON TIMES November 12, 2007

"The United States can little afford to have its sovereignty directly challenged bythis treaty, and we must activate the conservative grass-roots base to rise up in defenseof our country and our sovereignty," conservative activist Paul M. Weyrich said.Cliff Kincaid, an anti-U.N. activist and president of America's Survival Inc., said the U.S.does not need the Law of the Sea treaty to press its claims to the Arctic and itsmineral and energy riches. "Nobody bothers to point out that [U.S. Admiral Richard]Byrd flew over the North Pole for the United States 80 years ago," he said.

16


17/33


LOS BAD: Ineffective

LOS BAD: Wont define BaselinesBusinessWorld , May 22, 20 08 Thursday, Senate asked to OK body on territorial claim.Bernard U. Allauigan

"The approaches taken in dealing with territorial problems are piecemealand crisis-oriented, apparently on the assumption that national territory isfragmented into separate issues , each to be resolved by disconnected attempts andthus resulting in halfway and makeshift solutions ," she said. Congress isscrambling to pass a law that seeks to define the country's territorial boundaries as set in theUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that all archipelagicstates must submit claims for an extended continental shelf (ECS) on or beforeMay 13, 2009. But Ms. Santiago said the Philippines is "not obligated to submit a claim," adding

that Article 47 of UNCLOS does not compel archipelagic states to drawbaselines, and that there will be no sanctions for failure to define baselines.The bicameral body will be composed of 10 members with equal representation from the Senateand House of Representatives.

17


18/33


LOS BAD: Terrorism

LOS Bad: terrorismBBC Monitoring South Asia Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring May 28, 20 08Wednesday Sri Lankan navy chief discusses maritime terrorism in UK conference speech

The Al-Qa'idah network too is believed to have purchased at least 15 shipsin the last few years to be used in the same fashion as the LTTE - to be involved ingunrunning , act as weapon and explosive warehouses for terrorist groupsand possibly be used for training of bombers and saboteurs . They are alsoused as safe houses for terrorists on the run. Further , the law of the sea is alsoadvantageous to those who do not comply with the rule of law , allowingthem freedom of the sea and manoeuvre until reaching shore. The other terrorist groups that have and use maritime assets on a smaller scale are asthe following: ESO (External Security Organisation) Hezbollah's military wing,Lebanon ,ASG (Abu Sayyaf Group), Philippines, JI (Jemaah Islamiyah), SE Asia, NPA (NewPeople's Army), Philippines, Palestinian groups (Al Aqsa Martyrs),Brigade/HAMAS/Palestinian Islamic Jihad), Indonesian jihadi groups GAM (The FreeAceh Movement) Indonesia. The Emerging Threat There is no doubt that in recent yearsmaritime terrorism has appeared as a very real threat and what I havebriefly elaborated on proves the point. There have been some notable attacks but we

18


19/33


have been fortunate in that a concerted and sustained attack on the lifeblood of the globaleconomy has not yet materialized.

LOS TERRIBLEAerospace Daily & Defense Report , May 2, 20 08 Friday, USCG commandant pushesfor U.S. to sign Law of Sea Treaty, Bettina H. Chavanne, News; Pg. 5 Vol. 226 No. 24

But some analysts in Washington typically from conservative and libertarian think tanks have longdisagreed with U.S. accession to the treaty. The administration?s request is both fiscallyirresponsible and opposed to U.S. national interest, the Heritage Foundations Steven Groves saidin early February. If it is not withdrawn , Congress should reject the administrationsproposal and any other request to provide funding for internationalorganizations of which the United States is not a member. Groves argued thatthe treaty creates another unaccountable and opaque internationalorganization, sets a precedent for international taxation of U.S. companies,provides an avenue for international environmental regulation, andthreatens U.S. sovereignty by subjecting the United States and U.S.companies to mandatory dispute resolution in international venues thathave traditionally been stacked against U.S. interests.

19


20/33


LOS BAD: Russia Disad1.) Uniqueness.

A Mutual agreement has slowed the land race for the Arctic LOS willrenew tensionsBoswell 08 [ Randy, staff, Canwest news services, May 30, 2008 Edmonton Journal]

ILULISATT, Greenland - Ministers from the five Arctic coast nations -- includingCanada -- declared at a landmark conference here this week that " the race for the NorthPole is cancelled ," and that science and international law will now peacefully determinewho owns which parts of the vast, oil-rich polar seabed. But the race , in fact, has onlybeen transformed into a long, slow, three-way mud-wrestling match -- a five-yearstruggle between Canada, Russia and Denmark for the murky ground that lies thousands of metres beneath the pole and whichultimately will be decided, like any fight, by timing, power and strong-arm tactics -- or retreat. Science and law willonly go so far , say Canada's top polar experts, when it comes to defining the undersea boundaries between three nationswhose claims under a UN treaty are almost certain to overlap near the centre of the Arctic Ocean. That's when politics --no holds barred -- comes into play .

2.) Russia will defend continental shelf.Russia & CIS Diplomatic Panorama 08 [June 2, 2008, RUSSIA TO DEFEND CONTINENTAL SHELFRIGHTS IN LINE WITH INTL LAWS ...]

20


21/33


Russia confirms its intention to defend its rights to the Arctic continental shelf onthe basis of international laws and scientific data, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrovsaid at a meeting of the Russian government presidium on Monday. "We will stand up for our continental shelf rights on the basis of international laws and the scientific research we are conducting," he said. Lavrov recalled theGreenland meeting of the five Arctic nations - Russia, Canada, the United States, Norway and Denmark. He said that the delegatesadopted a declaration. Lavrov noted that the sides agreed to resolve all the shelf questions on the basis of international laws, amongthem the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 that provides sufficient tools for this.

LOS BAD: Russia Disad

3.)The Arctic is a hotspot for tension over sovereignty with Russia. If LOST passes, Russia would act out.Dyer, 08. [Gwynne, London Based Independent Journalist, June 2, 2008, The Daily Gleaner (New Brunswick) pg. C8]

Chilingarov is a polar explorer of the old school (he was made a Hero of the Soviet Union in the old days for saving an ice-bound shipin Antarctica), but he is now deputy speaker of the Russian Duma (parliament) and Vladimir Putin's personal "envoy" to the Arctic.Last summer, he took a three-man submarine down to the bottom of the Arctic Ocean precisely at the North Pole, and planted a

Russian flag in the seabed. "The Arctic is Russian. We must prove the North Pole is anextension of the Russian landmass ," he said afterwards, and affected surprise at the factthat other countries with an Arctic coastline saw this as a challenge to theirsovereignty. Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper, for example, flew to the Arctic the following week, and subsequentlyannounced that Canada would build six to eight new "ice-strengthened" warships for Arctic patrols. The other threecountries with Arctic coastlines, the United States (Alaska), Denmark (Greenland) and

Norway, are equally [ is] suspicious of Russian intentions . The real issue is about whoowns the rights to the seabed, and the Russian claim is pretty ambitious. Moscowclaims that the Lomonosov Ridge , the subsea mountain range that goes straight acrossthe middle of the Arctic Ocean, i s an extension of the Russian territorial shelf , andtherefore belongs to Russia all the way to the North Pole. Alternatively, if the Law of theSea tribunal does not ultimately accept that claim, Moscow may have an evenbroader claim in reserve. In the early 20th century, seven countries laid claim to parts of Antarctica on the basis of "sectors:" pie-shaped slices running along lines of longitude (which converge at the poles). The width of those slices depended onwhere the various claimants owned territories near Antarctica, mostly islands in the Southern Ocean. Those claims are dormant

21


22/33


because of a subsequent treaty banning economic development in Antarctica, but the precedent has not been forgotten. By that precedent , Russia could lay claim to about half the Arctic Ocean on the basis of lines of longituderunning from the far eastern and western ends of the country up to the North Pole - and in 1924 the old Soviet Union did precisely

that. Nobody else accepted that claim then, and they wouldn't now if Russia raised it again. But Russia has the bigArctic ports and the nuclear-powered icebreakers to make its claim stick, andnobody else does.

LOS BAD: Russia Disad

4.) We are on the brink of a new cold war in the arcticRaymen, 08 [ Sean, daily telegraph, May 18, Edmonton Journal, pg A4, Russian fleet boosts risk of Cold War over Arctic]

The battle for "ownership" of the polar oil reserves has accelerated with thedisclosure that Russia has sent a fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers into theArctic. It has reinforced fears that Moscow intends to annex "unlawfully" a vastportion of the ice-covered Arctic , beneath which scientists believe up to 10 billiontonnes of gas and oil could be buried. Russian ambition for control of the Arctic hasprovoked Canada to double to $40 million funding for work to map the Arctic sea bedin support its claim over the territory. The Russian icebreakers patrol huge areas of thefrozen ocean for months on end, cutting through ice up to 6ft thick. There are thought tobe eight in the region, dwarfing the British and U.S. fleets, neither of which includenuclear-powered ships . Canada also plans to open an army training centre for cold-weather fighting at Resolute Bay anda deep-water port on the northern tip of Baffin Island, both of which are close to the disputed region. The country's defence ministry

intends to build a special fleet of patrol boats to guard the Northwest Passage. The crisis has raised the spectre of Russia and the West joining in a new Cold War over the Arctic unless the UnitedNations can resolve the dispute. The crisis erupted last year when a Russian submarine crew planted a flag on theLomonosov Ridge, a 2,000-kilometre area of seabed that Moscow says is Russian. Derided at the time as a stunt, the move focusedattention on the race for the Arctic's hidden treasures. No country owns the Arctic Ocean or the North Pole, but under the 1982 UNLaw of the Sea Convention, each country with a coast has sole exploitation rights in a limited "exclusive economic zone." Onratification of the convention -- and the U.S. has yet to ratify it -- each country is given 10 years to make claims extending its zone

based on geology.

22


23/33


LOS BAD: Russia Disad Extensions

5.) LOS fuels geopolitical competition between Russia and the USThe Washington Times Sea treaty sparks rivalries; Senate fight looms amid race to

North PoleBy David R. Sands, THE WASHINGTON TIMES November 12, 2007

Moscow had submitted a claim in 2001 to a Law of the Sea panel, asserting ownership of some463,000 square miles of Arctic seabed based on the extent of its still largely unmapped northern shelf.Russia was told it needed more scientific evidence to support its claim. Pavel Baev, a researcher at theOslo-based International Peace Research Institute, said Russian President Vladimir Putin was quick to exploit the North Pole submarine venture in August for his own politicalpurposes, restoring Russian national pride and aggressively asserting Russianinterests on the global stage."The perception in Russia now is that there's a real geopolitical competition going

on in [the Arctic] ," Mr. Baev said. "You need to move fast to advance your claim because it's everynation for itself."

23


24/33


LOS BAD: Russia Disad Extensions6.) Russia is staking their claim in the Arctic, and doesnt want anychallengers.Dyer, May 29 What connects oil at $135 a barrel with last month's discovery of huge cracks in the Ward Hunt ice shelf off Ellesmere Island at the top of Canada's Arctic archipelago? And what might connect those two things with anew, even Colder War? he cracks in the ice, further evidence that the ice cover on the Arctic Ocean ismelting fast, were discovered by scientists tagging along with a Canadian army snowmobile expedition that

was officially called a "sovereignty patrol." The army was showing the flag because Canada, likethe other Arctic countries, suspects that valuable resources will become accessible thereonce the ice melts. And the most valuable of those resources are oil and gas. he strongestevidence for accelerated melting is the fact that more and more of the Arctic sea ice is thin "first-year" ice.Only about 3 feet thick, it spreads across the ocean each winter, but tends to melt the following summer.Melting has taken big bites out of the edge of the much thicker "permanent" ice in most recent summers,and unless some of the "first-year" ice that replaces it lasts through the following winter, then the meltingreally is speeding up. So everybody is watching to see what happens this summer, explained Dr. JimMaslanik of the University of Colorado - Boulder. "If we see all the first-year ice melt out again, then

probably we will have another record reduction in ice cover," said Maslanik. "If we see this a couple of years running, that tells us . . .that we are about 20 or 30 years ahead of where we are supposed to be basedon the climate models." If we are heading for an Arctic Ocean that is mostly ice-free in the summer, thendrilling for gas and oil beneath that ocean can soon begin. Hardly a week goes by withoutsomebody pointing to the U.S. Geological Survey's report that the Arctic basin contains a quarter of the world's undiscovered oil and gas. But the event that did most to trigger this new concern aboutsovereignty was Artur Chilingarov's publicity stunt last summer. Chilingarov is a polar explorer of the oldschool (he was made a Hero of the Soviet Union in the old days for saving an ice-bound ship in Antarctica),

but he is now deputy speaker of the Russian Duma (parliament) and Vladimir Putin's personal "envoy" tothe Arctic. Last summer, he took a three-man submarine down to the bottom of the Arctic Ocean preciselyat the North Pole, and planted a Russian flag in the seabed. "The Arctic is Russian. We must provethe North Pole is an extension of the Russian landmass," he said afterwards, and affected

24


25/33


surprise at the fact that other countries with an Arctic coastline saw this as a challenge to their sovereignty. Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper, for example , flew to the Arctic thefollowing week, and subsequently announced that Canada would build six to eight new"ice-strengthened" warships for Arctic patrols. Moscow claims that the LomonosovRidge, the subsea mountain range that goes straight across the middle of the Arctic Ocean, is an

extension of the Russian territorial shelf, and therefore belongs to Russia all the way tothe North Pole. Alternatively, if the Law of the Sea tribunal does not ultimately accept thatclaim, Moscow may have an even broader claim in reserve. In the early 20th centuryseven countries laid claim to parts of Antarctica on the basis of "sectors": pie-shaped slicesrunning along lines of longitude (which converge at the poles). The width of those slices depended onwhere the various claimants owned territories near Antarctica, mostly islands in the Southern Ocean. Thoseclaims are dormant because of a subsequent treaty banning economic development in Antarctica, but the

precedent has not been forgotten . By that precedent, Russia could lay claim to about half theArctic Ocean on the basis of lines of longitude running from the far eastern and western ends of thecountry up to the North Pole - and in 1924 the old Soviet Union did precisely that. Nobody elseaccepted that claim then, and they wouldn't now if Russia raised it again. But Russia has the

big Arctic ports and the nuclear-powered ice-breakers to make its claim stick, and nobodyelse does.

TensionsEven though most arctic nations have agreed to accept LOS, tensions stillexist over territorial boundaries .Gorrie, 08 . [Peter, Staff at Toronto Star, May 29, UN to play mediator in Arctic disputes; At stake is an estimated one-quarter of world's petroleum deposits on northern ocean floor]

The disputes have sparked heated words in recent years, most notably when Denmark planted its flag on a tiny rock outcrop calledHans Island in 2003 and again last year, when a Russian submarine crew put a flag on a disputed part of the ocean floor. But theissues are covered by the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, ratified by 151countries. The five ministers agreed to stop bickering and work out their differences under that treaty. "The five nations havenow declared that they will follow the rules," said Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller. "We have hopefully quelled all myths

about a race for the North Pole once and for all." They agreed to work co-operatively on environmentaland security concerns in the Arctic, where warming temperatures and melting ice are leading to a dramatic increase inhuman activity and threats to the fragile environment. Environmentalists slammed the deal as a "carving up" of a region that's stillrelatively pristine but promises great wealth in oil, minerals, trade and tourism. They want a global treaty for the Arctic similar to theone that bans mining and military activity in the Antarctic. They also complained that representatives of the other Arctic nations, aswell as Inuit and environment groups, were kept out of the closed-door session. "We would suggest that all the nations up there shouldagree not to open it up for drilling," said Tarjai Haaland, a climate and energy campaigner with Greenpeace Nordic. The five nationsexplicitly rejected the call for a replacement treaty. There is no need to develop "a new comprehensive international legal regime togovern the Arctic Ocean," the declaration stated. A Canadian expert on the Arctic agreed. Better to have a peaceful means of resolvingdisputes than embark on a lengthy, unpredictable try at a new treaty, said Michael Byers, professor of global law at the University of British Columbia. "The Law of the Sea is not perfect, but we have it," he said. "That the five countries reaffirmed their commitment toit can only be a good thing in a time of incredibly rapid change. We're not dealing with the Wild West here." Critics noted the irony of the conference location. The deal to allocate the huge fossil fuel reserves was held near the Ilulissat glacier - a world heritage site -

that is melting and flowing toward the sea at an increasing rate as climate change warms Greenland. The major disputescentre on ocean-floor areas that are beyond the countries' 370-kilometre territoriallimit but, under the Law of the Sea, are open to being claimed because they are partof the continental shelf or ridges extending from it. Canada is spending $40 million to map the seabed tosupport its claim for parts of the seabed, and the other four nations are preparing their own evidence. Canada and theUnited States also disagree on whether the Northwest Passage is an internationalwaterway , and over how the international boundary between Alaska and Yukonshould be extended into the Beaufort Sea.

25


26/33


NO Tensions

LOS allows Russia to claim a majority of the Arctic OceanThe New Zealand Herald http://www.thezimbabweindependent.comJune 3, 2008

Alternatively, if the Law of the Sea tribunal does not ultimately accept that claim,

Moscow may have an even broader claim in reserve.In the early 20th century, seven countries laid claim to parts of Antarctica on the basis of "sectors": pie-shaped slices running along lines of longitude (which converge at the

poles). The width of those slices depended on where the various claimants ownedterritories near Antarctica, mostly islands in the Southern Ocean.Those claims are dormant because of a subsequent treaty banning economic developmentin Antarctica, but the precedent has not been forgotten . By that precedent, Russiacould lay claim to about half the Arctic Ocean on the basis of lines of longituderunning from the far eastern and western ends of the country up to the North Pole -and, in 1924, the old Soviet Union did precisely that.

Nobody else accepted that claim then and they wouldn't now if Russia raised it again. But

Russia has the big Arctic ports and the nuclear-powered icebreakers to make its claimstick and nobody else does.

The US is working with Russian and others to find a peaceful way to dividethe Arctic.Fedyashin, June 3

26


27/33


Ilulissat, Greenland, will go down in history as the polar city where the ice moved for the first time _ foreign ministers and other representatives of the five Arctic nations _ Denmark (Greenland is its province),Canada, Norway, Russia, and the United States met there on May 27-29 to discuss a legal division of theArctic. It seems they have agreed on how to divide the Arctic Ocean, and, most important, its mineral-richcontinental shelf. The meeting produced the Ilulissat Declaration, which makes it plain that there is no needto draft a separate international agreement _ in settling territorial and other problems the

participants will be guided by the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea . Speaking atthe conference, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: "We do not share the alarming

predictions about a clash of interests between Arctic and even non-Arctic countries, abouta `battle for the Arctic.'" Other ministers spoke in much the same vein.It is a good sign that talks will

precede the cutting of the Arctic pie. The Convention on the Law of the Sea is a powerfuldocument of international law, almost a maritime constitution. It regulates what can andcannot be done on and with the ocean. But it is perhaps alarming that the participants in theconference are unanimously optimistic. All of them have grievances with their neighbors, or are displeasedabout the ocean's demarcation. Moreover, interests invariably clash when it comes to dividingno-man's-lands or marine basins that abound in mineral riches.

NO Tensions

Countries, including the US, are peacefully dividing the Arctic.The New York Times, May 29 Diplomats from the five countries bordering the Arctic Ocean adopted a declaration on Wednesday aimed atdefusing tensions over the likelihood that global warming will open northern waters to shipping, energyextraction and other activities. The agreement, reached after a daylong meeting in Ilulissat, Greenland ,said the United States, Canada, Russia, Norway and Denmark saw no need for newaccords on Arctic matters and would use existing international laws like the Law of theSea Treaty to resolve disputes . Greenland belongs to Denmark. The countries also agreed to work more cooperatively to limit environmental risks attending more Arctic shipping and commerce and tocoordinate potential rescue operations given the rising number of tourists heading north as sea iceincreasingly retreats in the summer. The meeting capped a frenetic year of Arctic activity ascountries vied to demonstrate their polar hegemony with a mix of rhetoric, militarymaneuvers and, in the case of Russia, a submarine voyage to the seabed at the NorthPole. One of the two participating minisubmarines left a titanium national flag on the bottom, 14,000 feet

beneath the shifting sea ice. In a statement, Per Stig Moller, Denmark's foreign minister, alluded to thatvoyage and the media blitz that followed. ''We have politically committed ourselves to resolveall differences through negotiations,'' he said. ''And thus we have hopefully, once and for all, killed

all the myths of a 'race to the North Pole. ' The rules are in place. And the five states have nowdeclared that they will abide by them.''

Countries, including the US, are peacefully dividing the Arctic.The New York Times, May 29 Diplomats from the five countries bordering the Arctic Ocean adopted a declaration on Wednesday aimed atdefusing tensions over the likelihood that global warming will open northern waters to shipping, energy

27


28/33


extraction and other activities. The agreement, reached after a daylong meeting in Ilulissat, Greenland ,said the United States, Canada, Russia, Norway and Denmark saw no need for newaccords on Arctic matters and would use existing international laws like the Law of theSea Treaty to resolve disputes . Greenland belongs to Denmark. The countries also agreed to work more cooperatively to limit environmental risks attending more Arctic shipping and commerce and tocoordinate potential rescue operations given the rising number of tourists heading north as sea iceincreasingly retreats in the summer. The meeting capped a frenetic year of Arctic activity ascountries vied to demonstrate their polar hegemony with a mix of rhetoric, militarymaneuvers and, in the case of Russia, a submarine voyage to the seabed at the NorthPole. One of the two participating minisubmarines left a titanium national flag on the bottom, 14,000 feet

beneath the shifting sea ice. In a statement, Per Stig Moller, Denmark's foreign minister, alluded to thatvoyage and the media blitz that followed. ''We have politically committed ourselves to resolveall differences through negotiations,'' he said. ''And thus we have hopefully, once and for all, killedall the myths of a 'race to the North Pole. ' The rules are in place. And the five states have nowdeclared that they will abide by them.''

NO Tensions

The US is working with Russian and others to find a peaceful way to dividethe Arctic.Fedyashin, June 3 Ilulissat, Greenland, will go down in history as the polar city where the ice moved for the first time _ foreign ministers and other representatives of the five Arctic nations _ Denmark (Greenland is its province),Canada, Norway, Russia, and the United States met there on May 27-29 to discuss a legal division of the

Arctic. It seems they have agreed on how to divide the Arctic Ocean, and, most important, its mineral-richcontinental shelf. The meeting produced the Ilulissat Declaration, which makes it plain that there is no needto draft a separate international agreement _ in settling territorial and other problems the

participants will be guided by the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea . Speaking atthe conference, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: "We do not share the alarming

predictions about a clash of interests between Arctic and even non-Arctic countries, abouta `battle for the Arctic.'" Other ministers spoke in much the same vein.It is a good sign that talks will

precede the cutting of the Arctic pie. The Convention on the Law of the Sea is a powerfuldocument of international law, almost a maritime constitution. It regulates what can andcannot be done on and with the ocean. But it is perhaps alarming that the participants in theconference are unanimously optimistic. All of them have grievances with their neighbors, or are displeasedabout the ocean's demarcation. Moreover, interests invariably clash when it comes to dividingno-man's-lands or marine basins that abound in mineral riches.

Russia wont pursue its claims in the Arctic by force. There are no resourcesfor them to find.Dyer, May 29

That is where the current panic comes from. It probably won't end up in a new Cold War, but ithas certainly got the hens in the chicken coop all stirred up. As is often the case with hens, they are

28


29/33


overreacting. Russia is in a more assertive mood than it was a decade ago, but there are no signs that itintends to pursue its claims by force . Moreover, there is no serious basis for the claim that aquarter of the world's undiscovered oil and gas reserves lie under the Arctic Ocean. Italways seemed implausible, given that the Arctic Ocean only accounts for slightly less than 3 percent of theEarth's surface, but in fact the U.S. Geological Survey never said anything of the sort. Neither has any other authoritative source, yet this factoid has gained such currency that it even influences government policy.Isn't it interesting how readily people will believe something when they really want to?

US in the Arctic

The US is staking claims in the Arctic.Washington Times, May 13


30/33


CANADA in the Arctic(a)Canada is claiming territories in the Arctic.The Seattle Post, May 29

Canada is preparing to claim an area of the Arctic Ocean seabed equivalent in size to thenation's massive "Prairie Provinces" - Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba - as part of Ottawa's aggressive effort to defend Canadian interests, Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunnsaid Wednesday. Lunn is attending an Arctic Council meeting Wednesday in Greenland with four other countries that have significant - and in some cases, competing - claims to territorial jurisdiction beyond thetraditional 200-nautical-mile limit.

"We will be reaffirming our commitment about defendingand protecting our sovereignty in the Arctic," Lunn said before the meeting. "It's a priority for our government. The prime minister has said: `Use it or lose it.' And we're not going to lose it."Denmark is host of the two-day Greenland meeting, which will also have representatives from Russia,

Norway and the United States. All five countries are preparing claims to the subsea continentalshelf under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea . The Americans have yet toratify the treaty. The participants will discuss how to proceed with economic and social development in thenorth, and how to give northerners more control, Lunn said. In doing so, they are attempting to

prevent an unbridled resource rush in which countries stake competing claims and ignoresocial and environmental problems in their haste to exploit what some believe is the

planet's last great, untapped source of energy and mineral resources. The U.S. GeologicalSurvey has estimated that as much as 25 per cent of the world's remaining oil and gasreserves lies under the Arctic Ocean, and access to those waters is improving as a result of melting sea ice. Russia sparked a furor last summer when a submarine planted a flag on a contested areaof the seabed, sparking fears of a 19th-century-style competition for territory among great powers. TheUnited States has sent icebreakers into waters that Canada believes should fall under itscontrol. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has pledged to beef up Canada's military presence inthe Arctic. He also recently vetoed a company's planned sale of its space robotics and satellite technology

business to a U.S. company on the grounds that Canada has a strategic interest in maintainingdomestic ownership over the firm's satellite, which provides surveillance of the Far North. Lunn

30
http://www.lexisnexis.com.hal.weber.edu:2200/us/lnacademic/search/XMLCrossLinkSearch.do?bct=A&risb=21_T3919988737&returnToId=20_T3920339882&csi=168800&A=0.9335490446321275&sourceCSI=9369&indexTerm=%23PE0009ZSL%23&searchTerm=Gary%20Lunn%20&indexType=Phttp://www.lexisnexis.com.hal.weber.edu:2200/us/lnacademic/search/XMLCrossLinkSearch.do?bct=A&risb=21_T3919988737&returnToId=20_T3920339882&csi=168800&A=0.9335490446321275&sourceCSI=9369&indexTerm=%23PE0009ZSL%23&searchTerm=Gary%20Lunn%20&indexType=P


31/33


said that Canadian scientists are amassing evidence that the Lomonosov Ridge, which extends under theArctic Ocean, originates in the North American continent. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was fashioned to prevent territorial claims based on raw force, and has a process for establishing

jurisdiction. Under the treaty, countries have jurisdiction for 111 kilometers beyond the base of acontinental shelf, but that claim can be extended for under-sea ridges extending from the shelf. Ottawa will spend $40 million over the next several years mapping the Arctic Ocean and

providing evidence that the Lomonosov Ridge is, in fact, part of the North Americancontinental shelf. If the U.N. validates that claim, Canada can assert sovereignty over theseabed all along the ridge, although experts expect Canada to claim the area west of the ridge andDenmark will assert sovereignty over the area east of the ridge and closer to Greenland. Lunn said that, intotal, Canada's claim would be about 1.8 million square kilometers. He said the U.N. bodyshould easily validate Canada's claim, which will be submitted in 2013. He said Canada needs toextend sovereignty over the region to ensure that any resource development is socially andenvironmentally responsible.

CANADA

LOS takes Arctic waters from Canada which kills their sovereignty andarctic ecosystemWeber, 08 . [Bob, The Canadian Press, May 27, North Bay Nugget, pg A6, Control of High Arctic waters 'critically important']

Control of High Arctic waters is "critically important" for both Canadiansovereignty and the protection of a fragile ecosystem , says federal Natural ResourcesMinister Gary Lunn. " It's critically important that it's under our sovereign control so

that we set the parameters for the environment and that we make the decisionswhether or not even to allow exploration ," Lunn said Monday on the eve of aninternational conference on the Arctic Ocean. Lunn is expected to travel to Ilulissat, Greenland, today for threedays of meetings with officials from the four other nations with continental shelves on the Arctic Ocean: Norway, Russia, the UnitedStates and Denmark. The conference is expected to discuss United-Nations-sponsored rules on dividing up jurisdiction over thosewaters, whose resources are becoming increasingly accessible as climate change reduces sea ice. The conference will also discusshow the five countries can co-operate on maritime safety, environmental protection and search and rescue. "We're going up to reaffirmour commitment on defending and protecting our sovereignty in the Arctic," Lunn said. The countries ringing theArctic Ocean are now filing their claims to the seabed under the UN Law of the SeaConvention . Canada is gathering data in support of a claim that includes a slice of the seabed stretching to the North Pole thatwould be the equivalent in size of the three Prairie provinces combined.

31


32/33


Random No risk of oil shock, most oil exists in the Arctic.Dyer, 08 . [Gwynne, London Based Independent Journalist, June 2, 2008, The Daily Gleaner (New Brunswick) pg. C8]

If we are heading for an Arctic Ocean that is mostly ice-free in the summer, thendrilling for gas and oil beneath that ocean can soon begin .Hardly a week goes by without somebody pointing to the U.S. Geological Survey's reportthat the Arctic basin contains a quarter of the world's undiscovered oil and gas .

Brink is now we are on the brink of discovering who is entitled to thearctic based on science, LOS would disrupt that.Boswell 08 [ Randy, staff, Canwest news services, May 30, 2008 Edmonton Journal]

Under current rules, the rights of coastal countries over sea floor resources are limitedto a fairly narrow strip of offshore territory -- no more than 350 nautical miles (648.2 kilometres), and onlyin places where the continental shelf extends that far out from the coast. But coastal states can claim muchmore territory if they able to show that undersea mountain ridges or other offshoregeological features -- such as the buildup of sediment from river discharges into thesea -- constitute a natural underwater extension of the national land mass. If so, they canclaim the ridge -- until the point where it drops 2,500 metres below the ocean surface -- plus 100 nautical miles (185.2 kilometres) of

seabed from that point. Under that key provision of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, all five polar countries arecompiling sea floor research to claim "Article 76" rights over potentially huge, Saskatchewan-sized swaths of Arctic Ocean bottom.And one of the most contentious parts of the underwater Arctic is proving to be the Lomonosov Ridge, a submerged mountain that isan excellent bet to qualify as a continental extension. It stretches thousands of kilometres from the Danish-Canadian boundary watersnorth of Greenland and Ellesmere Island, directly past the North Pole and across the Arctic Ocean toward the Siberian coast.

Russian, Canadian and Danish researchers all have gathered sea floor survey datasuggesting the ridge is an extension of their respective countries. Last summer, Russia launchedthe "race" for the North Pole -- and prompted outrage in Canada, Denmark and elsewhere -- by sending a mini-submarine to the four-

kilometre-deep sea floor at the pole and depositing a Russian flag made of titanium. More detailed scientific

32


33/33


analysis should ultimately determine which parts of the ridge belong to the Eurasiancontinent, which belong to North America.

33

Documents

Law of the Sea (Complete)[1]