Originally published on the CGS blog on October 24, 2007.
Conservatives are asking What Would Reagan Do on the Law of the Sea.
Personally, I don’t care all that much and would defer to the unanimous
judgment of today’s national security, business, and environmental
leadership. But some conservatives do care.
The answer to WWRD? Ratify. It’s not even close.
All living Chiefs of Naval Operations, all living State Department
Legal Advisors, and both of Reagan’s Secretaries of State say that his
objections were solely related to deep seabed mining. They agree that
Reagan would have approved of the most recent version of the treaty.
All that notwithstanding, opponents have maintained that Reagan was
fundamentally opposed to the Law of the Sea. They cite an entry in The Reagan Diaries from June 29, 1982:
“Decided in [National Security Council] meeting – will not sign ‘Law of the Sea’ treaty even without seabed mining provisions.”
Most
members of the Reagan administration interpret this entry to mean that
it would be unfeasible to sign the treaty without the seabed mining
provisions. In other words, Reagan decided that it was an all or none
proposition.
So, WWRD? On January 29, 1982, Reagan said:
“Last
March, I announced that my administration would undertake a thorough
review of the current draft and the degree to which it met United
States interests in the navigation, overflight, fisheries,
environmental, deep seabed mining, and other areas covered by that
convention. Our review has concluded that while most provisions of the
draft convention are acceptable and consistent with the United States
interests, some major elements of the deep seabed mining regime are not
acceptable. I am announcing today that the United States will return to
those negotiations and work with other countries to achieve an
acceptable treaty.”
After listing the problems with the seabed mining provisions, Reagan continued:
“The
United States remains committed to the multilateral treaty process for
reaching agreement on Law of the Sea. If working together at the
Conference we can find ways to fulfill these key objectives, my
administration will support ratification.”
WWRD? I don’t care all that much. But, for those of you that do, is there really any doubt?
Scott Paul
Note: If you haven’t seen it yet, Kate Sheppard has a great piece on Law of the Sea for the American Prospect. In the National Journal, Corine Hegland has an entire piece on the Reagan dispute that gets to the heart of the matter.
