IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 339 

Calling upon the United States Senate to give its advice and consent to 

the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 18, 2017 

Mr. COURTNEY (for himself, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Ms. BORDALLO, Mrs. 

DAVIS of California, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Mr. GALLEGO, Mr. 

SMITH of Washington, Mr. GARAMENDI, and Mr. LANGEVIN) submitted 

the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 

Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Calling upon the United States Senate to give its advice 

and consent to the ratification of the United Nations 

Convention on the Law of the Sea. 

Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Law of the 

Sea (UNCLOS) was adopted by Third United Nations 

Conference on the Law of the Sea in December 1982, 

and entered into force in November 1994 to establish a 

treaty regime to govern activities on, over, and under the 

world’s oceans; 

Whereas UNCLOS builds on four 1958 law of the sea conventions to which the United States is a party, including 

the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous 

Zone, the Convention on the High Seas, the Convention 

2 

•HRES 339 IH 

on the Continental Shelf, and the Convention on Fishing 

and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High 

Seas; 

Whereas the treaty and an associated 1994 agreement relating to implementation of the treaty were transmitted to 

the Senate on October 6, 1994, and, in the absence of 

Senate advice and consent to adherence, the United 

States is not a party to the convention and the associated 

1994 agreement; 

Whereas the convention has been ratified by 167 parties, 

which includes 166 states and the European Union, but 

not the United States; 

Whereas the United States, like most other countries, believes 

that coastal states under UNCLOS have the right to regulate economic activities in their Exclusive Economic 

Zones (EEZs), but do not have the right to regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs; 

Whereas the treaty’s provisions relating to navigational 

rights, including those in EEZs, reflect the United States 

diplomatic position on the issue dating back to 

UNCLOS’s adoption in 1982; 

Whereas becoming a party to the treaty would reinforce the 

United States perspective into permanent international 

law; 

Whereas becoming a party to the treaty would give the 

United States standing to participate in discussions relating to the treaty and thereby improve the United States 

ability to intervene as a full party to disputes relating to 

navigational rights, and to defend United States interpretations of the treaty’s provisions, including those relating 

3 

•HRES 339 IH 

to whether coastal states have a right under UNCLOS to 

regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs; 

Whereas relying on customary international norms to defend 

United States interests in these issues is not sufficient, 

because it is not universally accepted and is subject to 

change over time based on state practice; 

Whereas relying on other nations to assert claims on behalf 

of the United States at the Hague Convention is woefully 

insufficient to defend and uphold United States sovereign 

rights and interests; 

Whereas the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in their July 

12, 2016, ruling on the case In the Matter of the South 

China Sea Arbitration, stated, ‘‘the Tribunal forwarded 

to the Parties for their comment a Note Verbale from the 

Embassy of the United States of America, requesting to 

send a representative to observe the hearing’’ and ‘‘the 

Tribunal communicated to the Parties and the U.S. Embassy that it had decided that ‘‘only interested States 

parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of 

the Sea will be admitted as observers’’ and thus could not 

accede to the U.S. request.’’; 

Whereas the past Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jonathan Greenert, stated ‘‘as a party to UNCLOS, we will 

be in a better position to counter the efforts of coastal 

nations to restrict freedom of the seas’’ on February 16, 

2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Ray 

Mabus, stated, ‘‘the UNCLOS treaty guarantees rights 

such as innocent passage through territorial seas; transit 

passage through, under and over international straits; 

and the laying and maintaining of submarine cables’’, 

4 

•HRES 339 IH 

and, ‘‘the convention has been approved by nearly every 

maritime power and all the permanent members of the 

UN Security Council, except the United States’’, on February 16, 2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Ray 

Mabus, further stated, ‘‘Our notable absence as a signatory weakens our position with other nations, allowing 

the introduction of expansive definitions of sovereignty on 

the high seas that undermine our ability to defend our 

mineral rights along our own continental shelf and in the 

Arctic’’, and, ‘‘the Department strongly supports the accession to UNCLOS, an action consistently recommended 

by my predecessors of both parties’’, on February 16, 

2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the President and the Chief Executive Officer of the 

United States Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Thomas J. 

Donahue, stated, ‘‘we support joining the Convention because it is in our national interest—both in our national 

security and our economic interests’’, and, ‘‘becoming a 

party to the Treaty benefits the U.S. economically by 

providing American companies the legal certainty and 

stability they need to hire and invest’’, and, ‘‘companies 

will be hesitant to take on the investment risk and cost 

to explore and develop the resources of the sea—particularly on the extended continental shelf (ECS)—without 

the legal certainty and stability accession to LOS provides’’, on June 28, 2012, before the Senate Committee 

on Foreign Relations; 

Whereas the President and the Chief Executive Officer of the 

United States Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Thomas J. 

Donahue, further stated, ‘‘the benefits of joining cut 

5 

•HRES 339 IH 

across many important industries including telecommunications, mining, shipping, and oil and natural gas’’, and, 

‘‘joining the Convention will provide the U.S. a critical 

voice on maritime issues—from mineral claims in the 

Arctic to how International Seabed Authority (ISA) 

funds are distributed’’, on June 28, 2012, before the 

Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; 

Whereas the past Commander of United States Pacific Command, Admiral Samuel J. Locklear, stated that 

UNCLOS is ‘‘widely accepted after a lot of years of deliberation by many, many countries, most countries in my 

Area of Responsibility (AOR)’’, and, ‘‘when we’re not a 

signatory, it reduces our overall credibility when we bring 

it up as a choice of how you might solve a dispute of any 

kind’’, on April 16, 2015, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, 

Admiral Paul Zukunft, stated on February 12, 2016, 

state that ‘‘With the receding of the icepack, the Arctic 

Ocean has become the focus of international interest’’, 

and ‘‘All Arctic states agree that the Law of the Sea 

Convention is the governing legal regime for the Arctic 

Ocean . . . yet, we remain the only Arctic nation that 

has not ratified the very instrument that provides this accepted legal framework governing the Arctic Ocean and 

its seabed’’, and ‘‘Ratification of the Law of the Sea Convention supports our economic interests, environmental 

protection, and safety of life at sea, especially in the Arctic Ocean’’; 

Whereas the past Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jonathan Greenert, further stated, ‘‘remaining outside Law of 

the Sea Convention (LOSC) is inconsistent with our prinVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:21 May 19, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR339.IH HR339
6 

•HRES 339 IH 

ciples, our national security strategy and our leadership 

in commerce and trade’’, and, ‘‘virtually every major ally 

of the U.S. is a party to LOSC, as are all other permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and all other 

Arctic nations’’, on June 14, 2012, before the Senate 

Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the past Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jonathan Greenert, further stated, ‘‘our absence [from LOSC] 

could provide an excuse for nations to selectively choose 

among Convention provisions or abandon it altogether, 

thereby eroding the navigational freedoms we enjoy 

today’’, and, ‘‘accession would enhance multilateral operations with our partners and demonstrate a clear commitment to the rule of law for the oceans’’, on June 14, 

2012, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the United States Special Representative of State 

for the Arctic and former Commandant of the Coast 

Guard, Admiral Robert Papp, Jr., stated, ‘‘as a nonparty to the Law of the Sea Convention, the U.S. is at 

a significant disadvantage relative to the other Arctic 

Ocean coastal States’’, and, ‘‘those States are parties to 

the Convention, and are well along the path to obtaining 

legal certainty and international recognition of their Arctic extended continental shelf’’, and, ‘‘becoming a Party 

to the Law of the Sea Convention would allow the United 

States to fully secure its rights to the continental shelf 

off the coast of Alaska, which is likely to extend out to 

more than 600 nautical miles’’, on December 10, 2014, 

before the House Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and 

Emerging Threats of the Foreign Affairs Committee; 

Whereas the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, General 

Joseph F. Dunford, stated, ‘‘The Convention provides 

7 

•HRES 339 IH 

legal certainty in the world’s largest maneuver space’’, 

and, ‘‘access would strengthen the legal foundation for 

our ability to transit through international straits and 

archipelagic waters; preserve our right to conduct military activities in other countries’ Exclusive Economic 

Zones (EEZs) without notice or permission; reaffirm the 

sovereign immunity of warships; provide a framework to 

counter excessive maritime claims; and preserve or operations and intelligence-collection activities’’, and, ‘‘joining 

the Convention would also demonstrate our commitment 

to the rule of law, strengthen our credibility among those 

nations that are already party to the Convention, and 

allow us to bring the full force of our influence in challenging excessive maritime claims’’, on July 9, 2015, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, General 

Joseph F. Dunford, further stated, ‘‘by remaining outside 

the Convention, the United States remains in scarce company with Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Syria’’, 

and, ‘‘by failing to join the Convention, some countries 

may come to doubt our commitment to act in accordance 

with international law’’, on July 9, 2015, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John M. 

Richardson, stated, ‘‘acceding to the Convention would 

strengthen our credibility and strategic position’’, and, 

‘‘we undermine our leverage by not signing up to the 

same rule book by which we are asking other countries 

to accept’’, on July 30, 2015, before the Senate Armed 

Services Committee; 

Whereas the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John M. 

Richardson, further stated, ‘‘that becoming a part of 

8 

•HRES 339 IH 

[UNCLOS] would give us a great deal of credibility, and 

particularly as it pertains to the unfolding opportunities 

in the Arctic’’, and, ‘‘this provides a framework to adjudicate disputes’’, on July 30, 2015, before the Senate 

Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and 

Pacific Security Affairs, the Honorable David Shear, 

stated, ‘‘that while the United States operates consistent 

with the United Nations convention on the law of the sea, 

we’ve seen positive momentum in promoting shared rules 

of the road’’, and, ‘‘our efforts would be greatly strengthened by Senate ratification of UNCLOS’’, on September 

17, 2015, before the Senate Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Commander of United States Pacific Command, 

Admiral Harry B. Harris, stated that ‘‘all maritime 

claims must be derived from land features in accordance 

with international law as reflected in the Law of the Sea 

Convention, and any disputes should be settled peacefully 

and in accordance with international law’’, and, ‘‘our efforts would be greatly strengthened by Senate ratification 

of UNCLOS’’, on September 17, 2015, before the Senate 

Armed Services Committee; 

Whereas the Commander of United States Pacific Command, 

Admiral Harry Harris, stated ‘‘I think that by not signing onto it that we lose the creditability for the very same 

thing that we’re arguing for’’, and ‘‘which is the following—accepting rules and norms in the international 

arena. The United States is a beacon—we’re a beacon on 

a hill but I think that light is brighter if we sign on to 

UNCLOS’’, on February 23, 2016, at a hearing before 

the Senate Armed Services Committee; and 

9 

•HRES 339 IH 

Whereas the past Commander of United States Pacific Command, retired Admiral Dennis Blair, stated, ‘‘if we want 

to focus on the Asia-Pacific going forward, we’re going 

to have to find a way to pass the Law of the Sea because 

it does hurt us and it is striking to us that the Chinese 

have signed and they’re obligated but don’t want to do 

it’’, and ‘‘we have not signed but want them to do it, 

right? So it’s ironical to many in the region’’ on July 13, 

2016, before the Senate Subcommittee on East Asia, the 

Pacific, and International Cyber Security: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) affirms that it is in the national interest for 

3 the United States to become a formal signatory of 

4 the United Nations Convention of the Law of the 

5 Sea; 

6 (2) urges the United States Senate to give its 

7 advice and consent to the ratification of the United 

8 Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea 

9 (UNCLOS); and 

10 (3) recommends the ratification of UNCLOS 

11 remain a top priority for the administration, having 

12 received bipartisan support from every President 

13 since 1994, and having most recently been under14 scored by the strategic challenges the United States 

15 faces in the Asia-Pacific region and more specifically 

16 in the South China Sea. 

Æ