5cjxburmr

For example, the law of the sea provides that the high seas are reserved for peacefulpurposes. 4 However, the use of the high seas for peaceful purposes is understood not to imposerestraints upon military operations that would otherwise be consistent with international law, orto impair a State’s inherent right of self-defense. 5 The use of outer space for peaceful purposesalso has been interpreted in this way. 6As another example, certain rights under the law of the sea (e.g., certain rights ofnavigation of vessels, or rights of States with respect to exclusive economic zones) must beexercised with due regard for the rights and duties of other States. 7 To the extent this obligationapplies during armed conflict, what regard would be due would depend on military necessity andother principles and rules of the law of war, which are specially adapted to the circumstances ofarmed conflict. 813.1.2 The United States and the LOS Convention. The U.N. Convention on the Law ofthe Sea (LOS Convention) was opened for signature on December 10, 1982. 9The United States is not a Party to the LOS Convention. The United States did not signthe LOS Convention when it opened for signature because of several major problems in theConvention’s deep seabed mining provisions. 10 However, in 1983, the United States announcedthat it was prepared to accept and act in accordance with the balance of interests reflected in theLOS Convention relating to traditional uses of the oceans – such as navigation and overflight –and that the United States would exercise and assert its navigation and overflight rights andan understanding.”); William H. Taft, Legal Adviser, Department of State, Response to an Additional Question fromSenator Inhofe, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: Hearing Before the Committee on Environmentand Public Works, U.S. Senate, 108th Congress, Second Session, 77 (Mar. 23, 2004) (“As stated in the resolution ofadvice and consent now before the Senate, nothing in the Convention impairs the inherent right of individual orcollective self-defense or rights during armed conflict.”).4 Consider LOS CONVENTION art. 88 (“The high seas shall be reserved for peaceful purposes.”).5 Commentary—The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Agreement on Implementationof Part XI, 94 in MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT TRANSMITTING LOS CONVENTION (“Article 88 reserves the highseas for peaceful purposes, while articles 141 and 155(2) reserves the Area [which is defined in the LOS Conventionart. 1(1) as “the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction;”] for peacefulpurposes. … None of these provisions creates new rights or obligations, imposes restraints upon military operations,or impairs the inherent right of self-defense, enshrined in article 51 of the United Nations Charter. More generally,military activities which are consistent with principles of international law are not prohibited by these, or any otherprovisions of the Convention.”).6 Refer to § 14.10.4 (General Use of Outer Space for Peaceful Purposes).7 Refer to § 13.2.3.3 (Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs)); § 13.2.3.4 (High Seas).8 Refer to § 1.3.2 (The Law of War’s Relationship to Other Bodies of Law).9 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10, 1982, 1833 UNTS 397.10 Ronald Reagan, Statement on United States Oceans Policy, Mar. 10, 1983, 1983-I PUBLIC PAPERS OF THEPRESIDENTS 378 (“Last July, I announced that the United States will not sign the United Nations Law of the SeaConvention that was opened for signature on December 10. We have taken this step because several majorproblems in the Convention's deep seabed mining provisions are contrary to the interests and principles ofindustrialized nations and would not help attain the aspirations of developing countries. However, the conventionalso contains provisions with respect to traditional uses of the oceans which generally confirm existing maritime lawand practice and fairly balance the interests of all states.”).861