When foreign policy comes up at the debates this cycle, on one side
we hear one thing: ISIS ISIS ISIS. On the other side the refrain begins
with the dreaded, notorious, and monotonous Iraq War Vote, and then
Bernie Sanders wanders over the rainbow to a land where Saudi Arabia and
Iran team up like munchkins and flying monkeys to assure the defeat of
terrorism in that region by throwing a bucket of water on ISIS.
Ted
Cruz has raised this issue, but somehow it never quite makes it into
the meat of the debate. Donald Trump, of course, intends to crush China
by any means necessary.
The truth is, there is a means to combat
this aggression right at our fingertips and nothing is being done to
implement it. Here is the issue:
Beijing’s
provocative move to put sophisticated anti-aircraft missiles on little
Woody Island breaks previous promises and invites retaliation.
China deployed its advanced HQ-9 surface-to-air missiles
on Woody Island in the South China Sea sometime in the first half of
this month, Pentagon officials have revealed. Images of the missiles
were released yesterday by various news organizations, and Taiwan’s
defense ministry confirmed the reports.
The
Chinese deployment breaks a series of pledges Beijing made to the
United States and the international community, one as recently as last
month by Foreign Minister Wang Yi to Secretary of State John Kerry
during Kerry’s trip to Beijing.
The missile deployments will destabilize the already troubled South China Sea,
and the situation there could deteriorate fast as various nations,
including the United States, introduce military assets in response to
Beijing’s rapid build-up. Read more >>>>
Long
ago, back in 2008 before the election, those who were laying the
groundwork for the emergence of the Tea Party spoke in hushed, dire
tones about the "Law of the Sea Treaty" (LOST) as if it were some alien
conspiracy to divest the United States of certain powers and options.
The opposite was and is true.
As Secretary of State, Hillary
Clinton foresaw some probabilities on the foreign stage. One was the
Arab Spring. She warned the Arab elders at Forum for the Future
two years in a row that alienation from participation and unemployment
were severe problems boiling beneath the surface among their
populations. Hillary did not cause the Arab Spring. She predicted
trouble if inclusion and jobs were not prioritized by leadership. She
listened to their civil societies, perceived the growing unrest, and
warned.
Hillary also knew that ratification of LOST was important and urgent. Here is how she introduced a plea for ratification.
May 23, 2012
I
am well aware that this treaty does have determined opposition, limited
but nevertheless quite vociferous. And it’s unfortunate because it’s
opposition based in ideology and mythology, not in facts, evidence, or
the consequences of our continuing failure to accede to the treaty. So I
think you’ll hear, from both Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey as
well as myself, further statements and information that really
reinforces the very strong points that both of you have made.We believe
that it is imperative to act now. No country is better served by this
convention than the United States. As the world’s foremost maritime
power, we benefit from the convention’s favorable freedom of navigation
provisions. As the country with the world’s second longest coastline, we
benefit from its provisions on offshore natural resources. As a country
with an exceptionally large area of seafloor, we benefit from the
ability to extend our continental shelf, and the oil and gas rights on
that shelf. As a global trading power, we benefit from the mobility that
the convention accords to all commercial ships. And as the only country
under this treaty that was given a permanent seat on the group that
will make decisions about deep seabed mining, we will be in a unique
position to promote our interests.
(The "opposition
based in ideology and mythology" Hillary referred to was, in fact GOP
and specifically Tea Party opposition, making it odd that it is Ted Cruz
alone who occasionally brings the South China Sea to the table.)
And there was this.
Now
as a non-party to the convention, we rely – we have to rely – on what
is called customary international law as a legal basis for invoking and
enforcing these norms. But in no other situation at which – in which our
security interests are at stake do we consider customary international
law good enough to protect rights that are vital to the operation of the
United States military. So far we’ve been fortunate, but our
navigational rights and our ability to challenge other countries’
behavior should stand on the firmest and most persuasive legal footing
available, including in critical areas such as the South China Sea.
I’m
sure you have followed the claims countries are making in the South
China Sea. Although we do not have territory there, we have vital
interests, particularly freedom of navigation. And I can report from the
diplomatic trenches that as a party to the convention, we would have
greater credibility in invoking the convention’s rules and a greater
ability to enforce them.
Most will not remember that later in 2012, as Dems were gathering to renominate Barack Obama in Charlotte, Hillary was on her way to an ASEAN Summit where issues in the South China Sea would be at the forefront.
BRISBANE,
Australia — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is calling
for Southeast Asian states to present a united front to the Chinese in
dealing with territorial disputes in the South China Sea. SNIP
She
wants “to strengthen ASEAN unity going forward,” a senior U.S. official
told reporters on board Clinton’s plane as she flew from the Cook
Islands to Australia for a brief refueling stop en route to Indonesia. Read more >>>>
Issues
in the South China Sea would be far more easily settled if the United
States were to assume its leadership position at the table as the
world's leading maritime power. This is an issue Hillary carries in her
back pocket, and it has yet to arise in any question at a town hall or
debate. Here is what happened the last time LOST came up for a vote.
Readers
here know, it’s right there in the sidebar, the importance Hillary
Clinton invested in ratification of the Law of the Sea Treat (LOST). She testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on May 23 of this year calling ratification “urgent” if
the U.S. is to have equal footing on a level playing field in
conflicts arising over jurisdictions with regard to offshore drilling
and mining. Ratification would permit us to extend our own continental
shelf 200 miles – we have four of them! But Rachel Maddow
last hour reported, as her blog explains, that the GOP has likely
killed the ratification that would have boosted our economy and
strengthened our position both in the global economy and militarily on
the high seas. According to the blog post, the last two “nails in the
coffin” were Senators Rob Portman and Kelly Ayotte – names in the news
as possible Veep choices for Mitt Romney. Goes to show you, the
Republicans can be transparent … it is
possible. Stunning considering the long list of Republicans who
supported ratification. Ambition, apparently knows no party loyalty –
or common sense! Read more >>>>
If
President Obama looked a little haggard when he spoke to the press
today, it was not all about Congress stonewalling a SCOTUS nomination.
Guess where he was! And guess what they were talking about!
President
Barack Obama, center, speaks at the plenary session meeting of ASEAN,
the 10-nation Association of Southeast Asian Nations, at the Annenberg
Retreat at Sunnylands in Rancho Mirage, Calif., for Monday, Feb. 15,
2016. Sitting with Obama are Laos' president, Choummaly Sayasone, left,
and Brunei's sultan, Hassanal Bolkiah, right. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez
Monsivais)
A fair town hall or debate question at any
and all events this week should address foreign policy on a broader
scale than the Middle East. The South China Sea may be on the other
side of the globe, but what happens there affects us all. Only one candidate knows what needs to be done.
Here is an early morning headliner. I really hate to to have point
this out, but Hillary had a request about this. The link to that
request resides in the sidebar on this blog and will until there is a
resolution - i.e. ratification. Here is proof positive that Hillary
goes for diplomacy first. Others prefer military force, but not she and the uniformed guys she brought with her to Congress in 2012.
By Christopher Bodeen, The Associated Press 1:51 p.m. EDT October 15, 2015
BEIJING
— As expectations grow that the U.S. Navy will directly challenge
Beijing's South China Sea claims, China is engaging in some serious
image-building for its own military by hosting two international
security forums this week.
The events kick off Friday with an
informal meeting of defense ministers from the 10-member Association of
Southeast Asian Nations known as ASEAN — four of which exercise claims
to seas and islands in the South China Sea that clash with Beijing's
own. It is the first time China has hosted such a meeting.
That
will be followed by the Xiangshan Forum, at which analysts, military
leaders and others from around the globe will grapple with Asian-Pacific
security, maritime issues and anti-terrorism.
For
those who believe Hillary Clinton has a happy trigger finger and is too
quick on the military draw, this is her testimony before the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations Washington, DC May 23, 2012. We could
have been at the table negotiating this rather than sending ships.
SECRETARY CLINTON:Thank
you very much, Mr. Chairman, Senator Lugar. After both of your opening
comments, I think you’ve made the case both eloquently and persuasively
for anyone who is willing to look at the facts. I am well aware that
this treaty does have determined opposition, limited but nevertheless
quite vociferous. And it’s unfortunate because it’s opposition based in
ideology and mythology, not in facts, evidence, or the consequences of
our continuing failure to accede to the treaty. So I think you’ll hear,
from both Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey as well as myself,
further statements and information that really reinforces the very
strong points that both of you have made.We believe that it is
imperative to act now. No country is better served by this convention
than the United States. As the world’s foremost maritime power, we
benefit from the convention’s favorable freedom of navigation
provisions. As the country with the world’s second longest coastline, we
benefit from its provisions on offshore natural resources. As a country
with an exceptionally large area of seafloor, we benefit from the
ability to extend our continental shelf, and the oil and gas rights on
that shelf. As a global trading power, we benefit from the mobility that
the convention accords to all commercial ships. And as the only country
under this treaty that was given a permanent seat on the group that
will make decisions about deep seabed mining, we will be in a unique
position to promote our interests.
Now, the many benefits of this
convention have attracted a wide-ranging coalition of supporters.
Obviously, as we heard from both Senator Kerry and Senator Lugar,
Republican and Democratic presidents have supported U.S. accession;
military leaders who see the benefits for our national security;
American businesses, including, strongly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
seethe economic benefits. It has the support of every affected
industry, including shipping, fisheries, telecommunications and energy,
environmental groups as well. We have a coalition of environmental,
conservation, business, industry, and security groups all in support of
this convention.
And I would ask that my longer written statement
along with the letters that I have received in support of the treaty be
entered into the record.
I
am not just talking through my hat here. That is the brigade that
Hillary Clinton brought to Capitol Hill to testify about the Law of the
Sea Treaty. This is an avoidable crisis. Diplomatic efforts could have
diverted this had they attended to her request.
The Senate needs to ratify L.O.S.T. We can then take our seat at the table and avoid these conflicts. You may remember Marco Rubio bringing up the "synthetic islands" in the
last Republican debate. The whole issue could have been avoided years
ago.
Secretary
of State Hillary Clinton will urge cooperation on resolving regional
maritime skirmishes that have escalated over the past year during a
visit to Russia for an Asia-Pacific summit.
As President Barack
Obama’s representative at the Asia- Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit
in Vladivostok, Clinton meets today and tomorrow with the leaders of
Japan, South Korea and Russia, all of whom have competing territorial
claims with China or each other.
The top U.S. diplomat is wrapping
up a six-nation, 11-day tour that garnered mixed results in pressing
China and Southeast Asia countries to adopt a framework for negotiations
on territorial claims in a region rich in oil and gas. The U.S. is
seeking to diffuse conflict in the South China Sea, through which half
of the world’s commercial cargo moves. Read more >>>>>
None,
I repeat, NONE of the difficulty Hillary Clinton has encountered on
this Asia tour is necessary. All of the conflicts she is attempting to
settle through multilateral negotiations could have been brought to an
international convention for fair adjudication. Instead, like a busy
little bee (a really cute one) cross-pollinating frantically,
Secretary Clinton is compelled to buzz from one to another bilateral
meeting to try to bring disputes to settlement. She does so at an
extreme disadvantage with no muscle whatsoever because the United States
is still not a member of the Law of the Sea Convention (L.O.S.T.)
The
Law of the Sea Convention is a body of maritime states that agree to
certain stipulates, e.g. maritime borders may extend to as far as 200
miles offshore. The U.S. has four maritime borders. Members empower the convention to make decisions as to who may
do what where. Drilling and mining for rare minerals beneath the sea,
minerals used in our precious and necessary technology, our smart
phones and iPads, is governed by rights to areas of the sea. Not
being members, we have no voice regarding who may encroach upon our own
maritime borders nor upon those of our friends and partners e.g. some of
the countries Mme. Secretary has visited this week. This hobbles not
only Hillary Clinton in her efforts on her latest journey, but our
country going forward in this century, which, of course, is her concern.
We
are not members of this convention because our opportunity came to a
screeching halt just two months ago when the Tea Party essentially
killed ratification of L.O.S.T. in Congress.
Every day I
watch Hillary Clinton work her heart out for this country. Right now,
as I am writing this, she is working so hard to try, from a powerless
position, to negotiate settlements by shuttling from one to another
delegation. It is unnecessary. All of this could easily be settled peacefully before an international body we have snubbed by not ratifying the Law of the Sea Treaty.
Meanwhile,
our precious Hillary, we appreciate all you are trying to do and all
you have done. Come home safe. You have not failed in any way
anywhere. Your government-held-captive has failed you.
If
you understand what is happening here and disagree with how
Congress, by way of the Tea Party, has stymied our hard-working
Secretary of State and worse, the future of our country and its leading
role in world affairs, lobby your reps and vow to vote them out if they
do notRESURRECT L.O.S.T.!
If you thought the only targets in the Tea Party's sights were Barack
Obama's birth certificate and college records, please read on. Their
actions two months ago made Hillary Clinton's job on this Asia mission
infinitely more frustrating than it needed to be and subjected her to
attacks by the Chinese press.
From
left, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs
Kurt Campbell, U.S. Ambassador to China Gary Locke, Secretary of State
Clinton
In the pre-departure State Department briefing on
Secretary Clinton's current Asia trip, the Senior State Department
official (unidentified during the briefing, but probably Assistant
Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell who
did indeed meet up with her in Beijing) stated the following.
We
believe that the full range of issues in U.S.-China relations will be
discussed, from developments in Asia, developments on the Korean
Peninsula, issues associated with peace and stability in the Asia
Pacific region. We will touch on and deal with challenges associated with the South China Sea. We’ll talk about Iran, obviously developments in Syria, Afghanistan – the full range
The
Secretary of State, top diplomat, in dealing with conflicts and
disputes, relies, yes, upon her considerable personal skills of negotiation, but also
upon treaties, memoranda of understanding, and agreements between and among countries. We watched
her long hard slog, almost from the day she encountered Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov, through the hard work their teams put in to
formulate the New START Treaty, to the day she quietly, and unofficially
showed up on Capitol Hill in December 2010 to celebrate the ratification of that treaty for which she had fought so hard.
Similarly,
in this final year of her tenure at State, we have seen her lobby for
the ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty (L.O.S.T.). On May 23 of
this year we saw her argue before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that joining the convention was "urgent."
It was not about achieving a victory for Hillary Clinton. She never
cares who gets the credit as long as the work gets done. It was about
leveling the international playing field.
The
convention allows countries to claim sovereignty over their continental
shelf far out into the ocean, beyond 200 nautical miles from shore. The
relevant area for the United States is probably more than 1.5 times the
size of Texas.
The second development concerns deep seabed
mining, which takes place in that part of the ocean floor that is beyond
any country’s jurisdiction.... So as long as the United States is
outside the convention, our companies are left with two bad choices –
either take their deep sea mining business to another country or give up
on the idea. Meanwhile, as you heard from Senator Kerry and Senator
Lugar, China, Russia, and many other countries are already securing
their licenses under the convention to begin mining for valuable metals
and rare earth elements.
The third development that is
now urgent is the emerging opportunities in the Arctic. As the area gets
warmer, it is opening up to new activities such as fishing, oil and gas
exploration, shipping, and tourism. This convention provides the
international framework to deal with these new opportunities.
The
fourth development is that the convention’s bodies are now up and
running. The body that makes recommendations regarding countries’
continental shelves beyond 200 nautical miles is actively considering
submissions from over 40 countries without the participation of a U.S.
commissioner.
She argued eloquently that day
for us to take our seat at the table where maritime disputes worldwide
will be settled diplomatically and scoffed at and refuted predictions
that this treaty would put our military on black helicopters wearing
blue helmets (the argument we have been hearing from the Tea Party since they first co-opted the Gadsden flag) . Regardless of her logical arguments and the clear
benefits of ratification, L.O.S.T. was killed on July 17 of this year perhaps never to be revived. Here is how it was deep-sixed.
How the far right managed to kill a naval treaty that nearly everyone else supported
By Alex Seitz-Wald
What
if there were a piece of legislation in Congress today that had broad
bipartisan support along with the strong backing of the military and the
most powerful business interests in the country? That seems almost
unheard of in today’s polarized world, so it should sail through
Congress, right? Well, 34 senators, led by Tea Party hero Jim DeMint of
South Carolina, effectively killed it last night. The Law of the Sea
Treaty (which goes by the unfortunate acronym LOST) would codify a host
of international navigational, territorial and mineral exploration rules
that the country has abided by since the Reagan administration. But a
faction of Tea Party senators have secured enough opposition to stop the treaty before it even makes it to the Senate floor. Read more >>>>
Fast-forward to yesterday and the Chinese press greeting our top diplomat.
September 5, 2012
BEIJING US and China remain at impasse over Syria and tension persists over long-running territorial wrangle in South China Sea
Personal and stinging attacks in the state media heralded the US secretary of state‘s arrival in Beijing. “Many people in China dislike Hillary Clinton,” said an editorial in the state-run
Global Times. “She has brought new and extremely profound mutual
distrust between the mainstream societies of the two countries.” Such
stringent remarks were extremely unusual on the eve of a visit by a US secretary of state, noted Shi Yinhong, an expert on the bilateral relationship.
While
Clinton’s press conference with Chinese foreign minister Yang
Jiechi was more civil, it suggested no sign of movement on key issues.
The two countries remain at an impasse over Syria and tension persists
over the complicated and long-running territorial wrangle in the South China Sea, involving China and numerous other regional powers. Read more >>>>
Hillary Clinton met with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, at the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing Tuesday. Jim Watson/AP
Hillary
Clinton arrived in China on Tuesday, in what's likely to be her last
trip there as Secretary of State, but that milestone didn't stop China's
state-run media outlets from printing scathing editorials about her and
the U.S.'s growing unpopularity in the country. "Many Chinese people do
not like Hillary Clinton, her personal antipathy to the Chinese public
..." reads (via Google translation) an editorial in China's nationalist
newspaper Global Times, entitled "Secretary Clinton: the person
who deeply reinforces US-China mutual suspicion." The editorial goes on
to read (via a translation from NBC News's Ed Flanagan), "She makes the
Chinese public dislike and be wary of the United States, which does not
necessarily serve U.S. foreign policy interests." Well, that's pretty
blunt. What upsets the Chinese government has been President Obama's
newfound focus on the Asia-Pacific region, which means more attention is
paid toward China and its territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
And Clinton, despite enjoying her highest popularity ratings stateside,
has become the bullseye for unhappy Chinese nationalists even if she
won't be continuing her role as the country's top diplomat--Clinton has
said she was retiring at the end of this year. (We probably shouldn't
tell them about the VP rumors.) Xinhua, the country's state-run news
service was at least bit more diplomatic about being undiplomatic, with
an editorial that read (via a New York Times translation), "The
United States should stop its role as a sneaky troublemaker sitting
behind some nations in the region and pulling strings." Read more >>>>
Hillary
Clinton is accustomed to attacks. It is doubtful that any of this
bothered her on a personal level, but the fact that the U.S. has no
commissioner at the Law of the Sea convention makes it far more
difficult for her to negotiate in favor of our friends and partners in
maritime disputes with China over territorial rights. We have no voice
in this international body. So as China expands its borders and sea
shelf while disparaging our top diplomat and sneering at her efforts, we
have the Tea Party to thank. They effectively trapped her in a lobster-cage.
Readers here know, it's right there in the sidebar, the importance
Hillary Clinton invested in ratification of the Law of the Sea Treat
(LOST). She testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on May 23 of this year calling ratification "urgent" if the U.S. is to have equal footing on a
level playing field in conflicts arising over jurisdictions with regard
to offshore drilling and mining. Ratification would permit us to
extend our own continental shelf 200 miles - we have four of them! But Rachel Maddow last hour reported, as her blog explains, that the GOP has likely killed the ratification that
would have boosted our economy and strengthened our position both in
the global economy and militarily on the high seas. According to the
blog post, the last two "nails in the coffin" were Senators Rob Portman
and Kelly Ayotte - names in the news as possible Veep choices for Mitt
Romney. Goes to show you, the Republicans can be transparent ... it is
possible. Stunning considering the long list of Republicans who
supported ratification. Ambition, apparently knows no party loyalty -
or common sense!
It's
become extremely difficult -- far more difficult than any point in
American history -- for Congress to pass legislation. But treaties are
even harder, since they require 67 votes for passage. Even if every member of the Democratic caucus backs a treaty, it would need 14 Republicans to go along, and in this Congress, that's an implausibly high number.
This
is particularly relevant this week because of the Law of the Sea
Treaty, negotiated 18 years ago, and ratified by 161 countries around
the globe. Here in the U.S., it's been endorsed by the Clinton
administration, the Bush administration, the Obama administration,
business leaders, the State Department, the Pentagon, the Joint Chiefs,
and specifically U.S. Navy leaders who, as Josh Rogin explained,
see the measure as necessary "to allow the United States to fully
participate in the growing multinational system that governs the open
seas." Read more >>>>
We are an Arctic nation. Our intrepid SOS is there to establish our
concerns and presence in the region. Her work would be so much easier
if we would join the Law of the Sea (LOST) Convention where we have a reserved seat.
Hillary Clinton met with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, at the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing Tuesday. Jim Watson/AP
