Law of the Sea and the Hormuz Strait Incident

In discussing the strait incident over the last several days, something I have mentioned in passing a few times is the UN Charter on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and encouraging some professionals to evaluate how it applies to the Strait incident. My wife, an attorney who knows this stuff, has been ranting and raving about it. Like all husbands, I smile and nod.

She believes this recent incident in the Straits of Hormuz should be a wake up call to the Navy that there are legitimate issues with the UNCLOS that need to be evaluated, but she never really sat down with me to explain why. One detail in particular had me take pause and think about the UNCLOS as the details of the event became known, when the Navy released the above picture showing the helicopter used to provide security during transit, I immediately recognized that would not be allowed under the UNCLOS. I immediately downloaded the picture thinking the Navy might remove it, but they didn't, the picture is still up on the Navy website.

Eagle1, who by trade is an attorney who truly understands these types of maritime issues, links to this article and starts an excellent discussion of the various aspects of the issue.

However, irrespective of how Congress acts on the pending legislation on UNCLOS, the fact is that the US cannot have its cake and eat it. That is, rely on it to defend its navigational rights in the Strait of Hormuz and, simultaneously, disregard the various limitations on those rights imposed by the UNCLOS - and favoring Iran. These include the following:

Read the rest at Eagle1s place, he has the UNCLOS sections quoted as well to help understand the article. It is an angle the should be debated, because we keep hearing Bush is going to sign the UNCLOS into law this year.