"Also the US has not signed or ratified the UNCLOS III treaty."
They HAVE signed it.
en.wikipedia.org
"Countries that have signed, but not yet ratified - (27) Afghanistan, Bhutan, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Iran, North Korea, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Malawi, Morocco, Niger, Niue, Rwanda, Swaziland, Switzerland, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, United States."
________________
"the channels and straits - particularly the NORTHWEST PASSAGE - are not universally recognized as Canadian"
We know that it is not universal! The United States is hardly likely to legally deny their ability to use Canadian internal waters between and through her coasts and lands!
Likewise, there is no reason why US collaborators (such as Japan) should not follow their lead, as Nations always vie for resources and strategic waterways. Look at Malta or any other Mediterranean or Caribbean territories and the historical conflicts between stronger powers over who will control them (read who will USURP their sovereignty in whole or in part)! The fact that humans are rascals is never an argument for the rational legitimacy of particular claims. It is naive to consider that the States would not arrogate the right of passage to themselves or ensure it in some fashion. It is equally naive to consider this intrusion as justified by the Convention they signed but did not ratify.
Having said all of that, It is taken for granted by me that our interests are reciprocal and trump any treaties that are enacted for public consumption. Canada has every reason to grant the US a NW Passage, and every reason to restrict the universal use of the Passage by all nations. Thus, it is best to have a public recognition of Canada's sovereignty while maintaining private agreements... |
