Is a World Government on the Horizon?

President Bush is urging the Senate to ratify a treaty, supporters say, which will protect America’s access to strategic international waters and the natural resources they contain. The Law of the Sea Treaty But opponents warn the United Nation's "Law of the Sea Treaty" could be the next step to world government. The U.N. treaty governs the law of the seas - not just ocean access by military and commercial vessels - but control of natural resources from fishing rights and oil exploration to deep sea mining. The 25-year-old treaty rejected by President Reagan and signed by President Clinton is being pushed by Bush. He's urging the Senate to ratify the treaty that already has 154 nations on board. U.S. Navy Captain Pat Neher says The Law of the Sea Treaty is critical to national security and is needed to secure legal rights for U.S. armed forces to pass through key international straits. “We're not a party. We're on the outside with a very small number of countries like Iran, Syria, North Korea, Libya,” he said. Why are these so important? All the worlds’ commerce goes through choke points. And if the U.S. is going to get Iraq to re-supply American troops, it needs to go through the Straight of Hormuz. The U.S. doesn't want Iran, for example, to follow Australia's lead and use environmental regulatory control to try to assert authority over vessels carrying sustenance to American troops in Iraq. But Senate Republicans and some conservative groups warn that the treaty surrenders American sovereignty to a U.N.-like organization, called The International Seaboard Authority, or ISA. “It is comprehensive approach to addressing seven tenths of the world's surface and essentially turning it over to a U.N. on steroids,” former Reagan defense official Frank Gaffney said. Gaffney says the ISA is run by bureaucrats from countries such as Cuba, China, and Venezuela, who have a record of hostility toward American interests. “They’re people who are appointed, unaccountable, who operate in non-transparent ways. We don't elect them. They have no responsibility to us, and yet under this treaty they will have considerable ability to interfere with our lives,” Gaffney said. Americans Could Pay a Price The Navy says the treaty would not interfere with U.S. military activities. But critics worry Americans would still pay a price. The treaty would require U.S. companies who want to mine the sea or drill for oil to first seek ISA permission. They must share technology, and pay fees, critics say, that would amount to a redistribution of wealth. “The danger is once we get into this organization and submit to its dictates; once we start infusing tens of millions of dollars in terms of our annual tithing to pay for its operations, it's going to become a considerably more formidable,” Gaffney said. And Gaffney says even if the U.S. joins the treaty, there's no guarantee other member nations will play by the rules. “History is replete with examples in which we honor our treaty obligations and people who have nothing but contempt for treaties and international law will violate them,” he said. Gaffney says China is already guilty of treaty violations with its aggressive actions in the South China Sea. “We do have problems with China and reasserting rights contrary to the convention. Now, because we're not a party, we only have use of force - or ‘threat’ of use of force - in our tool kit. What’s better for us is to have all tools available to us – including dispute resolution,” Neher said. The Navy says ISA courts would settle disputes between nations. But without joining the treaty, America is denied a seat at the table with no vote or voice in the maritime debates. “In the old days, Ghadafi would claim water as ‘all mine,’ and we'd have to go out there and through use of force, tell him that he's wrong. Today it's a more complex and subtle world,” Neher said. Gaffney said, “The problem is, once we have a seat at the table, we're not going to be able to prevent bad things from happening. We will be obliged to live with whatever they come up with and we will be routinely outvoted.” So then, is the Law of the Sea Treaty a threat to American sovereignty – or the key to U.S. security? It's a decision that lies in the hands of the Senate as it moves to consider the decades-long debate.