Sunday, October 07, 2012

Darwin denyer sits on US House Science Committee

Congressman calls evolution lie from 'pit of hell'
He sits on the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

Georgia Rep. Paul Broun, M.D., said in videotaped remarks,
"All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell. And it's lies to try to keep me and all the folks who are taught that from understanding that they need a savior."
Broun also said that he believes the Earth is about 9,000 years old and that it was made in six days.

The Republican lawmaker made those comments during a speech Sept. 27 at a sportsman's banquet at Liberty Baptist Church in Hartwell.

Broun, a medical doctor, is running for re-election in November unopposed by Democrats.

Read more:

Labels: ,

Friday, October 05, 2012

US should try Conventional wisdom

The US is sending its traditional military resources to the seas west and northwestward of Guambat's burrow, as a show of strength in the South China Seize, perhaps, or maybe just a way to avoid the monsoon over Guam

If the former, the US would have a stronger hand to play if it adopted the wisdom of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, according to Michael Kelly, a Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Faculty Research & International Programs at Creighton University School of Law:

 China's Blue Water Ambitions and the Law of the Sea, JURIST - Forum, Oct. 4, 2012
Signed in 1982 and in force since 1994, UNCLOS establishes the legal framework for nautical sovereignty claims of coastal states. Such states may claim a 12-nautical-mile band of water immediately offshore as their territorial sea and an additional 200 nautical miles of water as their exclusive economic zone, within which they may assert dominance over natural resource exploration and exploitation. In the South China Sea, this amounts to vast fishing rights and control over oil reserves estimated at 213 billion barrels (larger than Saudi Arabia's reserves).

But within such waters, coastal states must also guarantee freedom of navigation rights for other states.

This basic framework of oceanic sovereignty is an extension of territorial sovereignty. As such, sea claims "run with the land." So in order for China's claims to go forward, it must successfully assert sovereignty over bits of land from which it can draw those lines (The Economist has provided a detailed map of the overlapping sovereignty claims of China, Vietnam, Brunei, the Philippines, and Malaysia in the South China Sea).

Even though the US recognizes many of the UNCLOS provisions as binding custom, it is still the "outsider." As such, it is difficult for the US to force compliance with UNCLOS provisions and impossible to avail itself of dispute resolution features as a party — the threat of which could induce better Chinese cooperation, especially in the case of island claims.

The rest of the permanent members of the UN Security Council belong to UNCLOS, as do the rest of the Arctic Council members, all of the Antarctic claimants, all of the South China Sea claimants and all of the other North Pacific regional powers except North Korea.

Not only will the US not be able to contain China through UNCLOS, as a non-party, it will not be able to stake its own nautical claims for fossil fuel development or even challenge the claims of others like Russia — which has staked out a region in the Arctic the size of France and Spain combined for exclusive Russian oil and natural gas development.

Smaller states with overlapping claims in the South China Sea have worked within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) political apparatus to arrive at a multilateral solution. However, the draft ASEAN "code of conduct" in the South China Sea, which seeks to settle disputes peacefully and keep the waters mostly demilitarized, was scuttled by Cambodia, the regional host for the July 2012 ASEAN meeting, at China's urging.

China understands it would lose in a multilateral environment with an array of states working against it. Thus, it prefers to deal with states (much smaller states) in bilateral settings where it can better leverage its power. That said, China realizes that it cannot bully larger states to get its way in oceanic matters.

The waters of the Arctic Ocean are largely controlled by the eight polar states: Canada, Russia, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, the US (via Alaska) and Denmark (via Greenland). Collectively, they set policy for the region through the Arctic Council which was created in 1996 to promote cooperation and coordination of activities.

Since the opening of trans-Arctic waterways in the wake of global climate change-induced ice melt, this has suddenly become a very important body of water for states that do a lot of global shipping, as well as states that are home to petroleum exploration companies seeking to develop the vast hydrocarbon reserves that are now becoming accessible. China possesses these twin interests. But it does not possess a seat on the Arctic Council or even permanent observer status.

As an "ad-hoc observer," China must go through the humiliating process of requesting to attend each individual meeting of the Council. China very much wants to advance its status to permanent observer (like Britain, France and Germany) so it can attend all the meetings as of right and potentially participate in working groups and task forces — clearly forums that help shape access policies with respect to navigation and natural resource development. But Norway opposes China's entry on human rights grounds. A diplomatic spat occurred in the wake of Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo winning the Oslo-based Nobel Peace Prize in 2010, and Beijing has not sufficiently made amends with the Norwegians — who could block China's advancement in the organization.

Unable to intimidate European states as it is able to do elsewhere, China must resolve this issue diplomatically if its more pragmatic oceanic interests are to be pursued. All of the above states are parties to UNCLOS except the US.

Since the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), the US has enjoyed unchallenged primacy in possessing the world's largest blue water navy.   Moreover, as half the world's shipping — worth over $5 trillion annually — passes through the South China Sea, protecting this right is paramount.    The US has not shied away from deploying this force to further its interests — including to the South China Sea — but such force projection requires freedom of navigation, a right guaranteed by UNCLOS.

It is manifestly in America's interest to ratify UNCLOS in the next session of Congress.  Republican and Democratic presidents alike have supported ratification, in addition to the Pentagon and the environmental lobby. The original hesitancy by private industry in the US of handing deep seabed mining authority over to the UN in the recovery of manganese deposits has evaporated.

The benefits of joining clearly outweigh any vague sovereignty concerns. Perhaps the biggest immediate benefit would be the ability of the US to throw the rulebook at China's feet on its oceanic claims in the same way that it can with respect to China's trading practices within the World Trade Organization — an analogously effective tool that Washington uses to help manage China's rise to great power.

Read more of Prof. Kelley's article, and in context, at the cite above.