- The Washington Times - Friday, May 25, 2012

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The rhetoric for passage of a high-seas treaty isn’t supported by the facts as demonstrated by our foreign policy during the Obama administration or past progressive administrations.

Once a treaty is ratified, it cannot be undone and it usurps our sovereignty and Constitution in enforcement. Secondly, no treaty has ever proven to be the bedrock for keeping America safe or for providing a means of forcing potential adversaries to comport their behavior and obligations in accordance with international law. The United Nations, through its Security Council, repeatedly has demanded that Iran and North Korea provide full accounting and transparency of their nuclear weapons programs. Neither state has done so; in fact, each has gone to great lengths to violate international laws and treaties they have signed (e.g. Iran and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty).

How will a high-seas treaty ensure American ships free, unfettered passage through the Straights of Hormuz, especially during times of potential conflict with Iran? None of the major signatories (Russia, France and China) of this treaty have proven to be reliable or dependable when it comes to enforcement of treaty protocols. So why are we even having this discussion? Treaties are proving to be nothing more than worthless paper, handcuffing countries that respect and abide by the rule of law while emboldening countries that ignore their responsibilities to the rule of law, shouting and demanding their rights while ignoring their obligations. This is much like what the freeloaders of society do.

ALAN J. QUARTARARO

Virginia Beach

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide