Do we want to redistribute America’s wealth to State sponsors of terrorism while hamstringing our defenses? Passing the Law of the Sea Treaty would do just that, enabling the United Nations to further raid America’s treasury, rob her sovereignty, and further empower the despots of the UN.

Here’s a question for the two Senators from Alaska: why would you be a party to empowering the tyrants and terrorists of the United Nations? Why would Alaska’s Governor Sean Parnell and Lt Governor Mead Treadwell also favor passing this treaty?

Our state’s leadership supports a treaty that would be catastrophic for America.

There have been three UN conventions on the Law of the Sea (LOST), the first in 1956, the second in 1960 (both held in Geneva, Switzerland), and the third in New York, 1973. The third convention finally concluded in 1982. The international treaty became enforceable in November, 1994, one year after the sixtieth state, Guyana, ratified the treaty. 162 countries have ratified LOST.

In its current form, the Law of the Sea consists of 17 parts, containing 320 articles and 9 annexes, governing ocean space, boundaries, environmental control, marine research, economic and commercial activities, transfer of technology and royalties, and the settlement of disputes relating to ocean matters.

In past administrations, the main obstacles to US Senate ratification have been the provisions in Part XI, articles 133 through 191 of LOST defining the area subject to international jurisdiction, and part VI, article 82, describing royalty distribution. All disputes would be resolved at an international tribunal headquartered in Hamburg, Germany.

The US Senate has never ratified the treaty. The Obama administration recently revived it and, although the Senate didn’t actually vote on it, LOST supporters were only one vote short of the 67 needed to ratify it (in the US, treaty ratification requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate and the President’s signature). LOST is sometimes called the ‘Zombie treaty’ because it keeps resurfacing after being rejected by the US Senate.

From my perspective, one of the biggest problems with the treaty is its re-distributive policies. America’s generosity has always been superior to that of any other country. Americans have freely given untold sums of aid to those in need. But now the US is supposed to sign a treaty mandating that Americans must give more, potentially sending trillions of dollars to ‘less developed’ countries, some of whom are known state sponsors of terrorism!

Resource exploration and development in effect becomes distribution of wealth to an ‘international authority.’ Of course, the resource extraction itself can only be done after receiving permission from that ‘authority’ to do so. Beyond our Continental shelf or ‘exclusive economic zone’, a percentage of revenue from resource production such as oil, would be distributed to the UN.

Resource development thus becomes the fuel for global power, a power that will further raid America’s wealth, redistributing it as well as the LOST resource revenues, to our enemies across the world.

I am also very concerned that ratifying LOST would greatly degrade America’s defense capability. The security of our allies throughout the world would be compromised. Access to ocean or maritime areas presently used and protected by the US Navy could be lost as sovereignty is lost to the UN. At risk is peace and liberty for many countries. America must not submit to the power of despots within the United Nations.

As noted above, not only does Governor Parnell and Lieutenant Governor Mead Treadwell strongly favor LOST, both of our US Senators do as well. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass., is pushing for ratification of the treaty, with a vote planned for the lame-duck session after the November elections. Alaska’s two Senators have said they’ll vote for it.

When you analyze treaties such as the ‘Law of the Sea’, the ‘UN arms treaty’, or proposals and policies found in things like the UN’s ‘Agenda 21’, or Coastal zone management, you find a common thread binding them together: internationalism. Either our elected representatives are ignorant, corrupted by special interests that gain from the new regimes, or they are globalists. More likely, they’re a bit of each.