International public law

1. “The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is far too vague to be considered anything more than some general guidance to States. In fact, given the absence of any articles whatsoever which determine, with any precision and clarity, what States can and cannot do in the oceans, the word ‘Law’ in its title seems totally misleading.” Please critically comment on the above statement and, where appropriate, indicate how you consider the statement to be incorrect;As the foundation for a regional maritime security framework, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has significant limits. The first is the ambiguity in countries with complex naval geography. For instance, the ambiguity in East Asia is partly due to the relatively complicated maritime geography of the region with its many islands, narrow shipping channels and archipelagos (Bateman 2007). However, the limits stem from the sophistication of UNCLOS, its numerous inherent ambiguities, and the subsequent growth of the law of the sea. These elements offer insights into generic global issues rather than the needs and peculiarities of specific areas. Nations in East Asia exhibit many differing viewpoints on the primary areas of UNCLOS, and there is no clear regional view evident on numerous issues. On the other hand, Cambodia, Thailand, the United States, North Korea, and Timor-Leste are not part of this treaty. The United States’ absence from the treaty is a considerable limitation of UNCLOS (Bateman 2007). The primary issue the United States had with the treaty was the ratification attitude of the powerful mining lobby to the sixth part of UNCLOS. There have also been concerns that ratification of the treaty could restrict maritime operations by the United States forces. Additionally, an article in the United States Navy Institute proceedings claimed that UNCLOS is defective on economic, national security, sovereignty, and judicial basis. Therefore, UNCLOS has various limitations based on its ambiguity and other factors.