Hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea

Statement

Hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And thank you, gentlemen. Welcome. I appreciate the testimony that you've given today and for the collective years of service that we see represented in various capacities. Thank you very much.

Certainly Alaska has a great deal of interest in what is happening with the Law of the Sea Treaty. We have half the coastline of the United States in the state of Alaska. When we recognize that the United States is an Arctic nation, we are an Arctic nation because of Alaska. So we've got a very keen interest when we discuss a treaty that governs the world's oceans and the ocean floors.

Ambassador Negroponte, you said that the U.S. has a distinct disadvantage when it comes to exercising sovereign rights, particularly on the continental shelf. There's a new Time Magazine this week that has a very intriguing picture, a floating iceberg out there with multiple flags: "Who Owns the Arctic?" And the article is about the debate over what happens as global warming/climate change advances and we see greater exposure in the north. We see commerce opening up in a part of the globe that we haven't seen; we've only dreamed about.

But we recognize that the landscape is changing up there. And as it changes, the discussion about who owns what is rather intriguing. You can't see this, but it's the top of the globe, the northern portion, redrawing the map with the respective flags of what Canada thinks is theirs, what Greenland thinks is theirs, what Sweden and the United States. But there's a big difference between thinking what is yours and what your legal claim to that may be.

I think that this was very clearly demonstrated just a few months back when the Russians go down and plant a flag, plant a flag on the bottom of the ocean seabed. If there's anything good that came out of that, I think it again sparked the question of what is the status. And getting to the legal certainty, I think, is where, from my perspective -- I'm looking at the Law of the Sea Treaty and saying this is incredibly important for the United States to be a full participant and to be sitting at the table when these decisions are made as to who has what.

The Coast Guard cutter Healy just came back from a mapping exploration of the Arctic to determine the extent of the U.S.'s continental shelf in the Arctic. Ambassador, if you can tell me what you believe the significance of the Healy's mission in terms of the U.S.'s overall policy as it relates to the Arctic. And what is the importance of the Law of the Sea when it comes to our Arctic policy? And I recognize that right now we are working still to update that Arctic policy, but if you can just tell me how they mesh here.

MR. NEGROPONTE: Right. The key aspect, Senator -- and I agree with everything you said -- the key aspect is the fact that the convention provides for a commission on the delimitation of the continental shelf. And therefore -- and that commission is where countries would submit their data that would justify their claim to whatever the extent of the continental shelf it is that they choose to assert. And then that commission is the one that makes the judgment as to whether the claim is justified.

So if we ratify the treaty, we will get a permanent seat on that commission and we'll be in a position to comment on the claims of other countries, which we're not able to do, and we'll also be able to submit our claim based on data collected by the Coast Guard cutter Healy or whatever other activities we do in order to map what we think should be our claim to the continental shelf, and then we will get the legal certainty, if we are members of that commission, that will come from the commission agreeing to the merits of our claim.

So I would agree with you, it's very, very important, and, in terms of a whole host of shelf activities, would add an element of certainty that doesn't exist at the moment.

SEN. MURKOWSKI: So let me ask you, then, if for instance the Russians have, I understand, a couple of years to file their claims to what they believe their claim to be on the continental shelf. If the information that the Healy brings back allows us to challenge that claim, if you will, if we are not a signatory to the treat, we would not be able -- the United States would not be able to contest Russia's claim?

MR. NEGROPONTE: That's correct. We have no standing in that commission.

SEN. MURKOWSKI: Let me ask also about Canada's claim that the Northwest Passage is an internal waterway and thus under their sovereign control. Has there been any progress in reaching an agreement on this matter, and would this be something that would be addressed bilaterally or through the Law of the Sea mechanism?

MR. NEGROPONTE: We have dialogue with Canada on this subject and we reached an understanding during the administration of President Reagan, on the basis of which our Coast Guard vessels have navigated through the Northwest Passage, but we have never agreed with the Canadian claim that it is internal water.

SEN. MURKOWSKI: So would it be an issue that would then come under the auspices of the Law of the Sea if we were to sign onto that treaty?

MR. NEGROPONTE: You know, I don't know the answer to that question. I'd have to submit that for the record, Senator.

SEN. MURKOWSKI: If you would, I'd appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source