Canada and the Law of the Sea Convention

INTRODUCTION One of the cornerstones of Canadian foreign policy throughout the 1970s and early 1980s was government support for the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III). Canadian involvement was extensive and generally thought to be successful in terms of immediate Canadian objectives and providing support for a more equitable and progressive international order. In many ways, Canada's enlightened self-interest on this issue was viewed as a sterling example of its policies towards international order and multilateralism. Canada readily signed the completed convention in 1982. However, it has yet to ratify it, even though the convention has been in legal force since 16 November 1994. Although concerns were voiced by some industrial states in the late 1980s and early 1990s over the convention's mining component, the offending articles have since been amended to the satisfaction of those states. The question remains: why has Canada not ratified the convention? Canadian indecision about ratification carries with it wider implications for Canadian foreign policy. Why has Canada, one of the major benefactors of the convention, been reluctant to ratify it? What insights does Canadian action and inaction on this issue provide into current Canadian foreign policy? In an attempt to answer these questions, this article addresses three topics. First, what is the current status of the Law of the Sea Convention? What issues have arisen and how have they been addressed since the convention was opened for signature in 1982? Second, what has the Canadian position been during the period between the final drafting of the agreement and the present? Third, what factors are behind Canadian actions and what do these actions (or lack thereof) say about Canadian foreign policy? CANADA AND MULTILATERALISM Before considering Canadian policy towards the convention, it is necessary to look at Canada's commitment to multilateralism. Since the end of the Second World War, the twin pillars of Canadian foreign policy have been the Canada-United States relationship and multilateralism.(f.1) Most Canadian foreign policy analysts have argued that Canada's self-proclaimed role as a middle power has been the central guiding principle for much of its postwar foreign policy. The reasons for Canada's commitment to multilateralism have been well-documented elsewhere. Suffice it to say here that there are three main sets of explanations. First, Canadian officials have found that the multilateral negotiating sphere is one to which Canadian talents are well suited. Numerous accounts by both researchers and practitioners have documented the success of Canadian negotiators in immediate postwar international forums.(f.2) It was logical that Canadian officials would continue to build on this success. Second, Canadians and Canadian decision-makers have tended to attach a significant normative element to the conduct of multilateralism. The image of Canada as a 'helpful fixer,' willing to assist the international community in whatever manner necessary, has become an enduring, if not an entirely accurate, element of Canadian self-perception.(f.3) There is a pride among Canadians in their role as the 'boy scouts' of the world. The third, and arguably most important, explanation for Canadian support for multilateralism is that it has been important to Canadian self-interests. For example, there is no doubt that Canada's support for international peacekeeping is in part because normatively it is the 'right' thing to do, but it also makes sense from a purely self-interested perspective. The farther away from Canadian borders that international conflict can be contained and resolved, the more secure Canada will be. Canadian participation in multilateral trade forums has been advantageous to the continued economic prosperity of the country. While Canada has one of the most developed and prosperous economies in the world, its relatively small size makes participation in multilateral trade negotiations necessary to sustain that prosperity

Convention · Foreign policy · Freedom of navigation · International law · Law of the sea · Multilateralism · Political science · Politics · Public international law · Ratification · Treaty · United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea · Arctic and Russian Policy Studies · International Maritime Law Issues · Law · Law, logistics, and international trade · Military and Defense Studies