Frothing from the right about United Nations involvement has stymied a world treaty on oceans protection that has broad support in Congress and the Bush administration.
The international “Law of the Sea” agreement, drafted in the 1970s and ratified so far by 143 nations, has been languishing in the U.S. Senate since the Clinton administration offered it for ratification in 1994, even though a vast majority of senators say action is long overdue.
The treaty attempts to outlaw exploitation of marine resources, such as over-fishing, by giving the United Nations some authority to referee compliance with regulations adopted by participating countries. That’s what raises the ire of conservatives such as former U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., and “Eagle Forum” founder Phyllis Schlafly, who consider the UN second only to Al Qaeda as a threat to U.S. sovereignty.
Yet at a Senate hearing last week, key Republican leaders voiced strong support for treaty ratification, as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had urged during her confirmation hearing in January 2005.
James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, told the Senate Commerce Committee on Nov. 16 that many Americans don’t realize that less than a quarter of the seafood they eat each year comes from U.S. waters – the rest is imported. For that reason alone, the United States needs a seat at the table when rules are established for how world fisheries are managed, he said.
Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, estimated that if the Law of the Sea Treaty made it to the Senate floor, “it would pass 93-7.”
But apparently no one wants to challenge the seven opponents, whom Stevens didn’t name, to release their stranglehold on the treaty, for fear of incurring the wrath of the very vocal far right.
