The US Policy in World Ocean

The U.S. has traditionally claimed a key role in the protection of international legal norms, including the use and exploitation of the ocean’s space and resources. This sphere is especially significant for it, as control over maritime routes is essential for American national security and prosperity. Therefore, the current article focuses on the current state of the U.S. policy regarding regulation in the World Ocean. The U.S. struggles against other states excessive maritime claims in the framework of the Freedom of Navigation Programme (FON). Its implementation is crucial not only to ensure US commercial and economic interests, but strategic and military also. First, it guarantees the possibility of American armed forces’ rapid transfer by sea. However, in some respects international maritime legislation restricts the United States ability to protect its interests. The U.S. fights against threats which pose a challenge to all countries of the world community like nuclear proliferation, piracy, maritime terrorism, all the while itself directly violating the norms and provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Moreover, the US desire to ensure itself a priority level of naval and intelligence activities leads Washington to broad interpretation of conventional norms. It also attempts to interpret some of the norms as part of the common legal order, which is applicable beyond Conventional terms. As a result, the US ocean policy can be qualified as contradictory and inconsistent because of its non-participation in the 1982 UNCLOS and because of it continuously encourages other states to respect the Convention's norms. The article, however, identifies some developments, which could force the United States to revisit its position and maybe join the 1982 UNCLOS.

1. Borgerson S. G. (2009). The National Interest and the Law of the Sea. Council on Foreign Relations Special Report. No. 46. 70 р.

2. Greene J. K. (1992). Freedom of Navigation: New Strategy for the Navy’s FON Program. Newport, Rhode Island: Naval War College. 26 p.

3. Groves S. (2011a). Accession to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea Is Unnecessary to Secure U.S. Navigational Rights and Freedoms. The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder. №2599. 24 August. 38 p.

4. Groves S. (2011b). U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea Erodes U.S. Sovereignty over U.S. Extended Continental Shelf. The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder. 2011. №2561. June 8. 13 p.

5. Harrison J. (2011). Making the Law of the Sea: a study in the development of international Law. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press. 340 p.

6. Klein N. (2011). Maritime Security and the Law of the Sea. N.-Y.: Oxford University Press. 376 p.

7. Kolodkin A.L., Guculyak V.N., Bobrova Yu.V. (2007). Mirovoj ocean. Mezhdunarodno pravovoj rezhim. Osnovnye problem. [World Ocean. The international legal regime. Main problems] Moscow: Statut. 637 p.

8. Kraska J., Pedrozo R. (2013). International Maritime Security. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 939 p.

9. Kraska J., Wilson B. (2009). American Security and Law of the Sea. Ocean Development & International Law. Vol. 40. Pp. 268-290.

10. Lodge W. M. (2013). The Common Heritage of Mankind. In: Freestone D. (ed) The Law of the Sea Convention at 30: Success, Challenges and New Agendas. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 212 p.

11. Lopez M.A.G. (2010). International Straits. Concept, Classification and Rules of Passage. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. 218 p.

12. Mandsager D. (1998). The U.S. Freedom of Navigation Program: Policy, Procedure, and Future. International Law Studies. Vol. 72. P. 113-127.

13. Roach J. A., Smith W. R. (2012). Excessive Maritime Claims. 3rd ed. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 925 p.

14. Rothwell D.R., Stephens T. (2010). The International Law of the Sea. Oxford-Portland: Hart Publishing. 545 p.

15. Svininyh E. (2011). Perspektivy prisoedineniya SSHA k Konvencii OON po morskomu pravu [The prospects of US joining the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea] Zarubezhnoe voennoe obozrenie №1: 69-78.

16. Tanaka Yoshifumi. (2012). The International Law of the Sea. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press. 501 p.

17. Vylegzhanin A.N. (ed.) (2012). Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. [International Law] Moscow: Yurajt. 904 p.

18. Vylegzhanin A.N. Kalamkaryan R.A. (2012). Mezhdunarodnyj obychaj kak osnovnoj istochnik mezhdunarodnogo prava [International custom, as the main source of international law]. Gosudarstvo i pravo. No. 6: 78-89.

19. Zhuravleva V.Yu. (2011). Peretyagivanie kanata vlasti: vzaimodejstvie Prezidenta i Kongressa SSHA [Tug of war power: the interaction of the President and the US Congress] Moscow: IMEMO RAN. 163 p.