Freedom of the Seas is a principle that governs unrestricted access to the high seas and to waters outside of national territory. First established by the Romans, it was challenged in the sixteenth century to secure trade and by a Papal Bull that sought to divide the oceans between Portugal and Spain. During the eighteenth century, the principle again became widely accepted when the definition of territorial waters was extended to include a three-mile zone. While the United States strongly took the position that neutral ships should be allowed to carry goods for belligerents in times of war, other nations enforced rules of contraband (mostly defined as military stores) and blockade. Now I will discourse about “Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by UNCLOS, 1982 and other rules of international law”. That is very important for us. That is very important for our life. Now we will know what is freedom of seas? Freedom of seas by UNCLOS, 1982.etc.
Introduction:
The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is the most comprehensive attempt at creating a unified regime for governance of the rights of nations with respect to the world’s oceans. The treaty addresses a number of topics including navigational rights, economic rights, and pollution of the seas, conservation of marine life, scientific exploration, piracy, and more. The treaty, one of the longest in history, is comprised of 320 articles and 9 annexes, representing the codification of customary international law and its progressive development.[[1]] The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea treaty, is the international agreement that resulted from the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), which took place between 1973 and 1982. The Law of the Sea Convention defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the world’s oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources. The Convention, concluded in 1982, replaced four 1958 treaties. UNCLOS came into force in 1994, a year after Guyana became the 60th nation to sign the treaty.<href=”#cite_note-history-1″>[[2]] As of October 2012, 164 countries and the European Union have joined in the Convention. The Secretary General of the United Nations receives instruments of ratification and accession and the UN provides support for meetings of states party to the Convention, the UN has no direct operational role in the implementation of the Convention. There is, however, a role played by organizations such as the International Maritime Organization, the International Whaling Commission, and the International Seabed Authority (the latter being established by the UN Convention). Freedom of the seas is a principle in the international law and law of the sea. It stresses freedom to navigate the oceans. It also disapproves of war fought in water. The freedom is to be breached only in a necessary international agreement. The United States’ allies Britain and France were opposed to this point, as France was also a considerable naval power at the time. As with Wilson’s other points, freedom of the seas was rejected by the German government. The high seas being open to all nations, no State may validly purport to subject any part of them to its sovereignty.
Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by these articles and by the other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and non-coastal States:
(1) Freedom of navigation;
(2) Freedom of fishing;
(3) Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines;
(4) Freedom to fly over the high seas.
These freedoms, and others which are recognized by the general principles of international law, shall be exercised by all States with reasonable regard to the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas.[[3]]
Principles for High Seas Governance:
Freedom of the Seas is a principle that governs unrestricted access to the high seas and to waters outside of national territory. First established by the Romans, it was challenged in the sixteenth century to secure trade and by a Papal Bull that sought to divide the oceans between Portugal and Spain
This became an important issue during the wars after the French Revolution when Great Britain and France imposed maritime blockades. To force these nations to change their policies (and also to end British impressments on American ships), the United States passed the Embargo Act (1807) and the No intercourse Act (1809). After France declared it would lift its blockade, and when Great Britain did not follow suit within a three-month period as demanded by President James Madison, the United States declared war on Great Britain in June 1812.
The United States accepted the concepts of contraband and blockade as legitimate during the Civil War but shied away from capturing Confederate diplomats off of neutral vessels during the Trent Affair. As long as the United States was a neutral during World War I and World War II, it protested the extensive blockades against Germany and very liberal British definitions of contraband.[[4]][[5]]
The first major challenge to the freedom of the seas principle after World War II was President Harry S. Truman’s 1945 announcement extending U.S. jurisdiction to natural resources on the continental shelf. Other nations followed by extending their territorial waters, some of them as far as 200 nautical miles. A 300-mile maritime defense zone around the American continents, established by the Rio Pact of 1947, was cited by the John F. Kennedy administration to legitimize the “naval quarantine” during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea agreed upon a 12-mile territorial limit and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone in December 1982.
There are ten principles of high seas. Those are:
1. Conditional freedom of activity on the high seas
The time of treating the oceans as “open access, common pool” resources are over. Our ocean resources have proven to be exhaustible, so their use needs to be regulated. There is a need to reaffirm and enforce international law, in particular United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS), and to condition the enjoyment of High Sea’s freedoms upon the implementation of the convention’s duties.
2. Protection and Preservation of the marine environment
The obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment, including in areas beyond national jurisdiction, is enshrined in many legal instruments at the global and regional levels, but this obligation has largely not been met. Today, an increasing number of threats makes it urgent to ensure such protection. There is a pressing need to deliver the World Summit on Sustainable Development targets and commitments towards ensuring the sustainable development of the world ocean, including those parts that lie beyond national jurisdiction.
3. International Cooperation
Biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction cannot be protected effectively unless countries act together. For conservation and management measures to be effectively implemented, coordination is essential across sectors and States. Institutional mechanisms for ensuring such cooperation are required.
4. Science-based approach to management.
Management decisions should be based on the best available science and not on the lobbying of a powerful few. Further scientific research is required to underpin ecologically sustainable resource use, to inform the adaptive application of conservation measures, and to enhance the development of criteria for monitoring. Scientific knowledge, understanding and awareness of the high seas and deep seabed need to be improved rapidly by building on and going beyond the various projects and initiatives currently undertaken. As conservation measures are applied in areas of resource use that have a commercial value, decisions relating to areas beyond national jurisdiction should also consider socio-economic information to encourage effective compliance and application of economic incentives.[[6]]
5. Public availability of information
We are just starting to learn more about the biodiversity of the high seas and deep seabed. To adequately manage these resources it is critical to increase knowledge of our ocean and the impacts of resource use and to make it available to the public. Information on the use of marine resources, in particular data from users, scientific observations and research results should be exchanged and made freely available.
6. Transparent and open decision making processes
Societies are demanding more effective management of fisheries and marine ecosystems and there is an urgent need to ensure greater transparency and increased participation by stakeholders in managing high seas resources. In addition, it is critical that decision-making processes are conducted in a manner that is transparent and accountable to minimize the likelihood of disputes and to promote international cooperation. Regional and global organizations need to promote the meaningful participation of all interested stakeholders in decision making, provide observers access to all meetings and documents and receive advice from all interested observers.
7. Precautionary Approach
The knowledge base for managing the high seas is arguably weaker than for other ecosystems, but this should not be used as ground for lack of action. Adaptive management allows decision-making to respond to changes and inherent levels of uncertainty. In high seas governance, more than any other place, the precautionary principle should become standard practice. Environmental assessment requirements and the precautionary approach should be operationalised for all high seas activities and should be used as a globally applicable default mechanism for existing, emerging and new activities on the high seas. This will require placing the burden of proof on those who argue that an activity will not cause significant harm to show that this is so, and make the responsible parties liable for environmental harm.[[7]]
8. Ecosystem approach
As was recognized by the United Nations General Assembly more than thirty five years ago, “the problems of ocean space are closely interrelated and need to be considered as a whole”. There is a strong need to consider the bigger picture, to give meaning to ecosystem management and to move away from the sect oral- and species-based approaches from which ocean governance systems have long suffered. Ecosystem approaches need to be further refined and made operational. Large scale marine spatial planning and networks of marine protected areas, and other area-based management measures for biodiversity conservation purposes, should be integral parts of an ecosystem approach to fisheries and oceans management. The high seas offer the ideal place to implement ecosystem management with fewer political boundaries, fewer stakeholders and virtually no property rights.
9. Sustainable and equitable use
Using ocean resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction requires a balance between the rights and interests of individual users and those of the international community. Management of resources should result in such resources being used in a sustainable manner to maintain the biological diversity to meet the needs of present and future generations. There is a need to discriminate against harmful practices and perverse incentives, especially destructive practices that adversely impact biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. There is also a strong need to promote and foster international cooperation and the development, adoption, and transfer of environmentally sound technologies on an equitable and mutually acceptable basis. Particular attention should be given to benefits to and the interests of developing countries.
9. Responsibility of States as stewards of the global marine environment
States need to bear responsibility for activities in the high seas by their own governmental agencies, by vessels under their flags, and by their nationals, both individual and corporate. States are responsible for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with international law and with the above-mentioned principles. The activities of ships and nationals in the high seas should require authorization and continuing supervision and monitoring by the appropriate State. In accordance with the polluter/user pays principle, States should be liable to other States and to the global community in case of damage to the marine environment and resources caused by their vessels and nationals.
United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982
Background:
Since humanity first set forth upon the seas, the issue of sovereign control over the oceans has been an ongoing concern. Prior to the 20th century, the oceans had been subject to the freedom of the seas doctrine. This principle, adopted in the 17th century, limited national rights and jurisdiction over a narrow band of water along a nations coast, the rest of the sea being free to all and belonging to none. Nearly a century later, the “cannon-shot” rule became the basis for determining how much of the adjacent oceans were under the jurisdiction of a nation. The cannon-shot rule set forth that a nation controlled a territorial sea as far as a projectile could be fired from a cannon based on shore. In the 18th century this range was approximate three nautical miles. As time progressed, three miles became the widely accepted range for the territorial sea.<href=”#endnote_1″ title=”#endnote_1″>[[8]]
Due to the slow pace of technological developments prior to the Industrial Revolution, these simple rules provided effective governance of the world’s oceans. With the technological developments of the mid-19th and early-20th centuries, however, not only did ships become more powerful, but technology allowed humanity to exploit ocean resources that had never before been envisioned. Fishermen, once limited to areas near their own coasts, were now equipped with vessels that could allow them to stay at sea for months at a time and capture fish harvests that were far from their native waters. Virtually unrestrained, fleets from around the world traveled to areas rich in fish-stocks. The lack of restraint on the part of these fishermen resulted in fish stocks around the world being depleted without regard to the stability of their numbers.[[9]]
Evolving technology also allowed for the exploitation of previously inaccessible off-shore resources, most notably oil (but also diamonds, gravel, and precious metals). To illustrate the rapidity of these developments, in 1947 off-shore oil production in the Gulf of Mexico was still less than 1 million tons. By 1954, production had grown close to 400 million tons. As a matter of perspective, just in the Gulf of Mexico, the United States alone currently produces 218,192 tons daily, for a total of 79.6 million tons annually, reflecting a steadily decreasing trend that began in the 1970’s.
In order to protect local resources, be they biological or mineral, nations began expanding their claims of sovereignty beyond the traditional 3 mile limit. The first nation to challenge the long-standing freedom of the seas doctrine was the United States. On September 28, 1945, President Harry S. Truman signed what has become commonly known as the Truman Proclamation. The proclamation set a claim of sovereignty by the United States to the outer continental shelf (OCS) and the resources therein as well as establishing the right of the U.S. to establish conservations zones “in areas of the high seas contiguous to the coasts of the United States.” While recognizing some limited sovereignty over an expanded region of the sea, the proclamation was careful to stipulate that the new US policy did not affect “the right [of] free and unimpeded navigation.”
After the United States expanded its claim, it was not long before other nations followed suit. By 1950, Argentina was actively claiming its continental shelf as well as the water column above it, Ecuador, Chile, and Peru were asserting rights over a 200-mile zone in order to protect its biological resources from foreign fleets, and a spate of Arab and Eastern European nations were laying claim to a 12-mile territorial sea. There was a growing understanding, however, that such a fractured regime could not continue.
UNCLOS-I
Recognizing the conflicts that were resulting from the current regime, the General Assembly adopted resolution 1105 (XI), which called for the convening of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in Geneva in 1858. Eighty-six nations participated (now commonly referred to as UNCLOS I). The meeting produced four separate conventions : 1) the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone (established sovereignty rights and rights of passage through the territorial sea, established the Contiguous Zone to extend 12 nautical miles from the baselines, but failed to set standards of limits on the territorial sea); 2) the Convention on the High Seas (established access for landlocked nations, expounded on the concept of “flag state,” outlawed the transport of slaves, covered piracy, established safety and rescue protocols, established a national duty to prevent pollution, and established rights to laying of undersea cables and pipelines);
3) the Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas (established the right of coastal nations to protect living ocean resources, required nations whose fleets leave their territorial sea to establish conservation measures, and established measures for dispute resolution); 4) and the Convention on the Continental Shelf (established the regime governing the superjacent waters and airspace, the laying and maintenance of submarine cables or pipelines, the regime governing navigation, fishing, scientific research and the coastal nation’s competence in these areas, delimitation, and tunneling). The Convention also produced an Optional Protocol of Signature Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes (provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, or for submission of the dispute to arbitration or conciliation). While UNCLOS I saw a significant development in the international legal regime governing the oceans, there were still many issues left unsettled.
UNCLOS-II
In an attempt to deal with the issues that remained unresolved after UNCLOS I, the General Assembly called for a second United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (now commonly referred to as UNCLOS II). The parties met for just over a month in early 1960 with the objective of settling the question on the breadth of the territorial seas and fishery limits. While the conference adopted two resolutions, the parties were unable to come to consensus on the issues at hand.
UNCLOS-III
Frustrated by the continuing inconsistency in the ocean governance regime, Malta’s ambassador to the United Nations, Arvid Pardo, called upon the General Assembly to take action and called for “an effective international regime over the seabed and the ocean floor,” that clearly defined national jurisdiction.
One month later, the General Assembly adopted resolution 2467 A (XXIII) and resolution 2750 C (XXV), which created the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Sea-Bed and the Ocean Floor beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction and called for the convening of a third Law of the Sea meeting to be held in 1973. The deliberations lasted for nine years, saw the participation of 160 nations, and concluded in 1982 with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is now commonly referred to as simply “UNCLOS” or the Law of the Sea Treaty. UNCLOS is one of the largest, and likely one of the most important, legal agreements in history. It synthesizes and builds upon the agreements that were developed at the first conference (see UNCLOS I above). The agreement addresses a myriad of issues including navigational rights of ships and aircraft, limits on the extension of national sovereignty over the oceans, environmental protection of the oceans, conservation of living resources and mining rights.
While UNCLOS was first signed in December of 1982, the agreement did not come into force until November of 1994, a period of nearly 12 years. UNCLOS required 60 signatures for ratification and could only enter into force one year after the final nation had ratified or acceded to the treaty. The main reason many nations took so long to sign the treaty is because of Article 309, which prohibits nations from taking out reservations to any part of a treaty. A reservation is a statement made by a nation when accepting a treaty, whereby it excludes or modifies the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty as those terms apply to the nation accepting the treaty. The inability of a nation to take out reservations to particular terms of the treaty caused many nations to hesitate. UNCLOS represented a significant number of compromises and some of the terms of the agreement did not sit well with various nations. However, in order to establish a unified doctrine of the law of the sea, UNCLOS necessarily had to prevent reservations or risk maintaining a fractured regime.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea lays down a comprehensive regime of law and order in the world’s oceans and seas establishing rules governing all uses of the oceans and their resources. It enshrines the notion that all problems of ocean space are closely interrelated and need to be addressed as a whole.
The Convention was opened for signature on 10 December 1982 in Montego Bay, Jamaica.
Exclusive jurisdiction over deep seabed mining disputes.
United States position
Although the United States helped shape the Convention and its subsequent revisions, and though it signed the 1994 Agreement on Implementation, it has not signed the Convention.
On July 16, 2012, the U.S. Senate had 34 Republican Senators who have indicated their intention to vote against ratification of the Treaty if it comes to a vote. Since at least 2/3 of the 100 member Senate (at least 67 Senators) are required to ratify a treaty, consideration of the treaty was deferred again.
Some American commentators, including former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, have warned that ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty might lead to its taxing authority being extended to cover the resources of outer space.
Other rules of international law:
International public Maritime Law is characterized by the quantity and complexity of regulations on the use of the World Ocean. It was not created as a whole, but developed gradually in response to prevailing conditions. There were two distinct stages in the history of its development.
The beginning of the second stage in development of Maritime Law was marked by the third United Nations Conference that was dedicated to the development and introduction into international practice of norms and rules on the use of the World Ocean resources and “rules of conduct” in the Ocean.
Convention contributes to the development of international Maritime Law:
1. It acknowledged, supplemented and developed a number of provisions stipulated in the Geneva Convention of 1958. Thus it put into law rules and norms of Maritime Law that had already been verified in practice.
2. It introduced new provisions so that the Convention.
3. The 1982 Convention precisely defined, for the first time, the boundary of the territorial sea that can be claimed by coastal states. It is limited to 12 nautical miles.
4. A compromise on the demands by some states for territorial rights up to 200 miles offshore was embodied in the concept of the exclusive economic zone.
5. Laws to govern research and exploitation in areas of international seabed were established.
6. The concept of archipelagic waters was introduced for the first time.
7. In view of demands by coastal states for wider territorial seas the right of transit passage through international straits was defined.
The principle provisions of modern Maritime Law that constitute international public maritime law fall into three categories.
The first set of conventions regulate the legal regime of maritime areas.
The second set of regulations relate to the safety of navigation.
Other conventions are intended to protect the marine environment. The most significant is the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1973, which was changed according to the Protocol of 1978 with subsequent Amendments (MARPOL 73/78). Other international agreements on marine environmental protection are the: International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties of 1969; the Protocol on Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Pollution Casualties by Substances Other Than Oil of 1973; the <href=”#4″ target=”_blank”>International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1992; the International Convention on the Creation of an International Fund for Compensation of Damage from Pollution by Petroleum of 1992; the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter of 1972. <href=”#part_xii_protection_and_preservatio” target=”_blank”>Part XII of United NationsConvention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 “Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment” defines the modern international legal regime of marine environmental protection and may be considered as a constituent of international environmental law (Avramenko, 2001a, Section I).
Although the conventions and agreements listed above are the source of most international public Maritime Law, there are also significant contributions from regional conventions and bilateral agreements. International Maritime Law concerning the high seas has no direct relation to the coastal zone but knowledge of its basic provisions is necessary for complete understanding of the law governing the coastal zone.
The term “high seas” means all parts of the sea that are not included in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a state. The high seas being open to all nations, no state may validly subject any part of them to its sovereignty.
Obviously, the legal regime of the high seas unlike other kinds of maritime areas is regulated only by norms of international law. Two of the sources of international law concerning the high seas are the Convention on the High Seas of 1958 and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982.
One of the most important and distinctive features of the high seas is that it is open, in full sense of this word to all states, both coastal and land-locked.
According to Convention on the High Seas of 1958 freedom of the high seas includes:
1. Freedom of navigation;
2. Freedom to fish;
3. Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines;
4. Freedom to fly over the high seas.
The convention of 1982 extended the concept of freedom of the high seas to include two additional items:
5. Freedom to construct artificial islands and other installations permitted under international law;
6. Freedom to do scientific research.
Thus freedom of the high seas is not absolute. States may exercise the freedoms specified above, provided that they take into account the interests of other countries. Modern international law maintains the principle of freedom of the high seas, and this is the foundation of the legislation that governs navigation at sea. All states, whether coastal or not, have the right to allow ships to sail under their flag. Ships can only sail under the flag of one state and are subject exclusively to that state’s jurisdiction while at sea. However, naval vessels and other ships and aircraft on government service have the right of interference on the high seas if international maritime law is being violated. In other waters law enforcement is in the hands of the sovereign state.
The Convention on the High Seas of 1958 defines cases and rules when such interference can take place:
1. on the basis of an existing international treaty;
2. if the ship is engaged in piracy;
3. if the ship is engaged in the slave trade;
4. if though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship;
5. in executing the right of hot pursuit.
In recent years an additional reason for interfering on the high seas appeared: pollution. In 1969 an International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties was adopted. Thus international Environmental Law as well as international Maritime Law apply to the high seas. The Convention gave coastal states the right to interfere on the high seas to prevent, reduce or eliminate the threat of oil pollution by a foreign vessel due to an accident on the high seas. As oil is not the only marine pollutant a Protocol on Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Pollution Casualties by Substances Other Than Oil was introduced in 1973.
CONCLUSION
Finally we want to see that freedom of the seas is a principle in the international law and law of the sea. It stresses freedom to navigate the oceans. It also disapproves of war fought in water. The freedom is to be breached only in a necessary international agreement. The Law of the Sea Convention defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the world’s oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources. These freedoms and others which are recognized by the general principles of international law, Concluded in 1982 with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is now commonly referred to as simply “UNCLOS” or the Law of the Sea Treaty. However, in order to establish a unified doctrine of the law of the sea, UNCLOS necessarily had to prevent reservations or risk maintaining a fractured regime.UNCLOS clearly distinguishes between the high seas and the other maritime zones, including the EEZ. Continued reliance by the United States on the distinction between national waters and international waters in an effort to articulate the right to engage in high seas freedoms in and over the EEZ is an anachronism and should be replaced by reference to the maritime zones reflected in UNCLOS .Its negotiating history make clear that activities routinely conducted on the high seas, such as military exercises, weapons testing, surveillance and reconnaissance operations, military oceanographic surveys, hydrograph surveys, flight operations, right of visit, maritime security and law enforcement operations.
References:
1 . <href=”#ref_1″>^ United Nations, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (A Historical Perspective), available at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_historical_perspective.htm (accessed 9 June 2010).
2. <href=”#ref_2″>^ Ibid.
3. <href=”#ref_3″>^ Ibid.
4. <href=”#ref_4″>^ United States Energy Information Administration, Gulf of Mexico Fact Sheet, available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oog/special/gulf/gulf_fact_sheet.html (accessed 10 June 2010); United States Energy Information Administration, Energy Calculators, available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energy.cfm?page=about_energy_conversion_calculator-basics (accessed 10 June 2010); United States Energy Information Administration, Crude Oil Production, available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/crudeproduction.html (accessed 10 June 2010). Note: Due to differences in density in various types of oil, the actual volume of a ton of oil can be different from barrel to barrel. As such, the numbers provided are best guess estimates based on the information available and should not be viewed as exact.
5. <href=”#ref_5″>^ President Harry S. Truman, President Truman’s Proclamations on U.S. Policy Concerning Natural Resources of Sea Bed and Fisheries on High Seas, available at http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy/1945/450928a.html (accessed 10 June 2010).
6. <href=”#ref_6″>^ Ibid.
7. <href=”#ref_7″>^ United Nations, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (A Historical Perspective), available at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_historical_perspective.htm (accessed 9 June 2010).
8. <href=”#ref_8″>^ United Nations, Diplomatic Conferences: United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, 1958, available at (http://untreaty.un.org/cod/diplomaticconferences/lawofthesea-1958/lawofthesea-1958.html (accessed 10 June 2010).
9. <href=”#ref_9″>^ Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, 29 April 1958, 516 U.N.T.S. 205. (available at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_territorial_sea.pdf)
10. <href=”#ref_10″>^ Convention on the High Seas, 29 April 1958, 450 U.N.T.S. 11 (available at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_high_seas.pdf).
11. <href=”#ref_11″>^ Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas, 29 April 1958, 559 U.N.T.S. 285 (available at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_fishing.pdf).
12. <href=”#ref_12″>^ Convention on the Continental Shelf, 29 April 1958, 499 U.N.T.S. 311 (available at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_continental_shelf.pdf).
13. <href=”#ref_13″>^ United Nations, Diplomatic Conferences: United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, 1958, available at (http://untreaty.un.org/cod/diplomaticconferences/lawofthesea-1958/lawofthesea-1958.html (accessed 10 June 2010); International Law Commission, Law of the Sea: Regime of the Territorial Sea, available at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/summaries/8_2.htm (accessed 11 June 2010).
14. <href=”#ref_14″>^ United Nations, Diplomatic Conferences: United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, 1960, available at http://untreaty.un.org/cod/diplomaticconferences/lawofthesea-1960/lawofthesea-1960.html (accessed 10 June 2010).
15. <href=”#ref_15″>^ United Nations, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (A Historical Perspective), available at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_historical_perspective.htm (accessed 9 June 2010).
16. <href=”#ref_16″>^ United Nations, Diplomatic Conferences: United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, 1973-1982, available at http://untreaty.un.org/cod/diplomaticconferences/lawofthesea-1982/lawofthesea-1982.html (accessed 9 June 2010).
17. <href=”#ref_17″>^ Ibid.
18. <href=”#ref_18″>^ United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, December 10, 1982, 1833 U.N.T.S. 397 [hereinafter UNCLOS].
19. <href=”#ref_19″>^ UNCLOS art 308.
20. <href=”#ref_20″>^ Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, art 2(1)(d).
22. <href=”#cite_ref-11″>^ V Bantz, ‘La Question De I’Adhesion Par Les Etats-Unis a La Convention Des Nations Unies Sur Le Droit De La Mer’ (2003) 8 Annuaire Du Droit De La Mer 9–54
23. <href=”#cite_ref-12″>^ Johnson, Keith. “GOP Scuttles Law-of-Sea Treaty”. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 17 July 2012.
24. <href=”#cite_ref-13″>^ Wong, Kristina. “Rumsfeld still opposes Law of Sea Treaty.” The Washington Times 14 June 2012.
25. http://www.unesco.org/csi/act/russia/legalpro6.htm
26. http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_high_seas.pdf
27. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/10_principles_for_high_seas_governance___final.pdf
28. http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm
29. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea
30. http://www.asil.org/losreports/LOSReportsVol12010w4Pedrozo.pdf
31.http://www.eoearth.org/article/United_Nations_Convention_on_Law_of_the_Sea_%28UNCLOS%29,_1982
32. http://www.unesco.org/csi/act/russia/legalpro6.html
[1] http://www.eoearth.org/article/United_Nations_Convention_on_Law_of_the_Sea_%28UNCLOS%29,_1982
[2] ^ <href=”#cite_ref-history_1-0″>a <href=”#cite_ref-history_1-1″>b <href=”#cite_ref-history_1-2″>c “The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (A historical perspective)”. United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. Retrieved April 30, 2009.
[3] http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_high_seas.pdf
[4] President Franklin D. Roosevelt, nonetheless, established “maritime control areas” at the beginning of World War II that extended into the high seas.
[5] In both wars, activities of German U-boats against neutrals provoked sharp American protest: by President Woodrow Wilson after the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915, and by Roosevelt in September 1941 after the torpedoing of American ships.
[6] http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/10_principles_for_high_seas_governance___final.pdf
[7] http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/10_principles_for_high_seas_governance___final.pdf
[8] <href=”#ref_1″>^ United Nations, The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (A Historical Perspective), available at http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_historical_perspective.htm (accessed 9 June 2010)
[9] <href=”#ref_2″>^ Ibid.
[10] <href=”#ref_18″>^ United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, December 10, 1982, 1833 U.N.T.S. 397 [hereinafter UNCLOS].
[11] <href=”#ref_19″>^ UNCLOS art 308.
[12]<href=”#ref_20″>^ Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, art 2(1)(d)