The United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (LOS), the regime governing international water rights and management of maritime resources, has been a controversial subject in the United States for more than 30 years and spanning five presidencies. This summer, it has once again garnered headlines, as competing political factions in the U.S. Senate lock horns over a possible ratification vote. We focus on the details of the convention, and the key arguments for and against it, in the September issue of International Debates.
When international negotiations for the LOS Convention were completed in 1982, President Ronald Reagan refused to sign on, contending that the provisions regarding deep-sea mining overregulated private enterprise. In 1992, after the mining provisions were renegotiated to address the concerns of the United States and other Western nations, President Bill Clinton signed the treaty and sent it to the U.S. Senate for approval by a two-thirds majority (67 votes).
After languishing in the Senate for years (See International Debates, April 2005), President George W. Bush endorsed the convention and urged the Senate to take action. In 2007, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to recommend Senate advice and consent to the treaty. Support in the full Senate was uncertain, however, and the convention was never brought up for a vote.
This year, President Obama and the convention’s supporters have once again pushed for ratification. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held another series of hearings, and committee Chairman Senator John Kerry (MA-D) is pledging to put the matter to a vote after this fall’s elections.
Opposition to the convention has hardened in recent years, however, and the three leading opponents in the Senate — Senators Jim Inhofe (OK-R), Jim DeMint (SC-R), and Mike Lee (UT-R) — tout the fact that there are currently enough senators on record opposing the convention (34) to deny it the votes necessary for ratification.
So now, the battle lines are drawn on the LOS Convention. On one side are many Democrats; moderate, internationalist Republicans; the U.S. military; and business interests such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, shipping companies, and the oil and gas industry. On the other side is a faction of the Republican Party that views the United Nations with suspicion, if not outright disdain. They see international treaties such as the LOS as infringing on U.S. sovereignty and possibly opening the door to foreign influence on U.S. domestic law.
This faction, backed by the grass-roots tea party movement, has been growing in strength in recent years, often at the expense of Republicans who were more supportive of international organizations and agreements, and the LOS Convention in particular. Lee, for instance, defeated incumbent Sen. Robert Bennett (UT-R) in that state’s 2010 Republican Party convention. This year, six-term Senator Richard Lugar (IN-R), a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and strong supporter of ratification of the LOS Convention, was defeated by a Republican Party primary opponent. In the Texas race to replace retiring Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison — who has taken no position on the LOS Convention — Republican Senate nominee Ted Cruz took outspoken positions against the United Nations and international treaties, and successfully defeated a better-known, better-financed opponent.
Meanwhile, only two of the 34 Republican votes currently on record against the convention are at risk this fall. In Arizona, Senator Jon Kyl is retiring — and the open seat is being contested by Congressman Jeff Flake (R-AZ), a likely vote against the treaty, and former U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona (D). In Nevada, incumbent Republican Senator Dean Heller (who was appointed in 2011) is being challenged by Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (NV-D). There is also the likelihood that some currently Democratic seats will switch parties this fall, jeopardizing other possible votes in favor of ratification
The fallout from this is that when the new Senate goes into session in January 2013, chances are there will be more anti-LOS votes, not fewer. Perhaps this is why supporters of the convention are making such a strong push for ratification in a lame-duck session after the election this fall. To do so, however, they will have to change the mind of at least one Republican senator who is already on record opposing passage.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Tom Donahue recently said that he thinks this is possible, and the combined lobbying efforts of industry groups like the Chamber of Commerce, which has a great deal of sway within the Republican Party, can’t be underestimated.
Over the past few years, there have been increasing tensions between the grass-roots, tea party faction of the Republican Party versus the pro-business, internationalist, establishment portions. Which side gains an upper hand in the coming months and years could well determine the fate of the LOS Convention.
International Debates will continue to monitor the issue and keep readers apprised of the latest developments.
