[Early Draft/Idea] International Waters Convention

[Astuana]

International Waters Convention

A resolution to minimize conflicts over jurisdiction in oceans and/or any other waterways.

Description: To the World Assembly

Affirming that it is the right of every nation to claim its sovereign rule of any body of water it is adjacent to.

Recognizing that all nations should have a claim over any body of water and practice their jurisdiction in said waters.

Distressed at the fact that many nations disregard a nation’s sovereign claim on a body of water that it is their right to claim.

Suggesting that the world assembly adopt this resolution in the hopes of resolving these situations.

Resolving these disputes and other situations by recognizing a measured distance from any point of land as the jurisdiction of that nation.

Where hereby:

A nation’s jurisdiction will cover any area that is within 10 miles off of any shoreline belonging to them.

The contiguous zone will extend from the 10 mile mark for another 10 miles.

The Exclusive Economic Zone will extend 300 miles from shore.

International Waters are recognized as extending from the 10 mile mark from the shoreline and beyond.

Establishing

Canals are considered International Waters

Rivers are not protected by this resolution and that any partition of said waterways is left to the discretion of the nations at hand.

Lakes shared by two more nations will be partitioned by the countries at hand.

[Separatist Peoples]

"This is already covered by Law of the Sea."

[Imperium Anglorum]

You're looking for this: http://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_past_resolutions/council=1?start=167

CDSP — Seas, with the 's'. The Law of the Sea got repealed, so Bears Armed submitted a new one with the 's' on the end to make it different, I guess.

[Terricon]

You're looking for this: http://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_past_resolutions/council=1?start=167

CDSP — Seas, with the 's'. The Law of the Sea got repealed, so Bears Armed submitted a new one with the 's' on the end to make it different, I guess.

I keep seeing resolutions with a "mild" rating. Shouldn't the Law of the Sea be considered a little more severe or important than an average resolution?

[Grays Harbor]

Aside from the fact this is already illegal for duplication...

Canals are considered International Waters

You have just made every internal canal "international".

[Separatist Peoples]

You're looking for this: http://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_past_resolutions/council=1?start=167

CDSP — Seas, with the 's'. The Law of the Sea got repealed, so Bears Armed submitted a new one with the 's' on the end to make it different, I guess.

OOC: can't expect my memory to be perfect. Sometimes I miss a letter, I'm not going to worry about it. What do I need, ulcers?

[Grays Harbor]

You're looking for this: http://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_past_resolutions/council=1?start=167

CDSP — Seas, with the 's'. The Law of the Sea got repealed, so Bears Armed submitted a new one with the 's' on the end to make it different, I guess.

OOC: can't expect my memory to be perfect. Sometimes I miss a letter, I'm not going to worry about it. What do I need, ulcers?

(The rest of us already have them. What makes you so frelling special? *grabs maalox*)

[Bears Armed]

The Law of the Sea got repealed, so Bears Armed submitted a new one with the 's' on the end to make it different, I guess.

Yep, that was why the change.

I keep seeing resolutions with a "mild" rating. Shouldn't the Law of the Sea be considered a little more severe or important than an average resolution?

OOC: Passing resolutions affects member nations' stats, so the 'Strength' specified should reflect the actual effects likely. In the case of 'Law of the Seas' it was presumed that establishing rules on the limits of territorial waters would slightly reduce the potential causes for international conflict and thus could be expected to result in a slight decrease (on average, across the membership) in defence spending.