Theme of

Global Dialogue 2019:

(September 1st 2018 to August 31st 2019)

Canada, the overseer and custodian of the Earth's north polar region. (A proposal of Global Community.)

Germain Dufour
July 2018

Canada, the overseer and custodian of the Earth's north polar region. (A proposal of Global Community.)
( see enlargement Canada, the overseer and custodian of the Earth's north polar region. (A proposal of Global Community.))

The animation, speech and paper for the theme.
Canada, the overseer and custodian of the Earth's north polar region. (A proposal of Global Community.) Canada, the overseer and custodian of the Earth's north polar region. (A proposal of Global Community.)


The astonishing beauty of the North is itself a natural resource. Glaciers are made of the purest drinking waters on Earth. There is also a vast array of different life-form communities such as the polar bears, Arctic foxes, seals, beluga whales, northern fulmars, and those communities of organisms that inhabit the sea floor like brittle stars, worms, zooplankton, microalgae, bivalves and some of the lesser known sea spiders. Everyone of those communities have an Earth right of ownership of the North and of all its natural resources. It is their birthright. They dont express themselves in English, but we understand them. Human beings have a moral obligation to protect and conserve the biodiversity of life on Earth.

The Northwest Passage is a sea route that connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago.

From the east coast of Canada and the Atlantic Ocean, the Northwest Passage runs through waterways such as the Davis pass and Baffin Bay. From there on there are seven different channels, collectively known as the Northwest Passages, to get to the west coast but not all of them are good for large ships. Only two channels are considered accessible to large ships. All of them are a part of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, and they include the Prince of Wales pass, Dease pass and the McClure pass. Then the Northwest Passage runs through Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea and, finally, the Bering Strait that separates Russia and Alaska, to the Pacific Ocean.

Learning to live in harmony with our environment is a challenge that we all face today in the Northwest Passage. Global Civilization has risen to this challenge and proposed sound solutions. The stewardship of our natural resources is a responsibility we all have. Sovereignty implies control, authority within a territory, and also implies responsibility, environmental protection, and maintenance of international security over that territory. Earth management is certainly an important part of sovereignty. The focus should be on the Earth management of the Northwest Passage.

There are many aspects of Earth management:
Conservation, restoration, and management of the Earth resources is about asking ourselves the question of "Who owns the Earth?" We can create a biodiversity zone in the North by way of Earth rights and taxation of natural resources.

The Arctic is an essential part of Canada’s history. One of our Fathers of Confederation, D’Arcy McGee, spoke of Canada as a northern nation, bounded by the blue rim of the ocean. Canadians see in our North an expression of our deepest aspirations: our sense of exploration, the beauty and the bounty of our land, and our limitless potential.

But the North needs new attention. New opportunities are emerging across the Arctic, and new challenges from other shores. Global Civilization Global Civilization offers a new global order with a vision of hope and love away from despair and social chaos. will bring forward an integrated northern strategy focused on strengthening Canada’s sovereignty, protecting our environmental heritage, promoting economic and social development, and improving and devolving governance, so that northerners have greater control over their destinies.

To take advantage of the North’s vast opportunities, northerners must be able to meet their basic needs. The Canadian Government will work to continue to improve living conditions in the North for First Nations and Inuit through better housing.

The Canadian Government will build a world-class arctic research station that will be on the cutting edge of arctic issues, including environmental science and resource development. This station will be built by Canadians, in Canada’s Arctic, and it will be there to serve the world.

As part of asserting sovereignty in the Arctic, the Canadian Government will complete comprehensive mapping of Canada’s Arctic seabed. Never before has this part of Canada’s ocean floor been fully mapped.

Defending our sovereignty in the North also demands that we maintain the capacity to act. New arctic patrol ships and expanded aerial surveillance will guard Canada’s far North and the Northwest Passage. As well, the size and capabilities of the Arctic Rangers will be expanded to better patrol our vast Arctic territory.

We will not explain here why we need to have a biodiversity zone in the North because I believe most people know why it is necessary and must be done. But we will show it can be done, and Global Civilization has published countless Newsletters to explain why Newsletters since 1985.. The fundamental definition of the "Global Community" includes all people, all life on Earth. Global Community is this great, wide, wonderful world made of all these diverse global communities of all life-forms. It also implicitly says that no-one in particular owns the Earth but we all own it together. Not just us people, but all life on Earth owns it. The land ownership of the Earth means ownership of the land and of all other Earth natural resources. Global Community is defined around a given territory, that territory being the planet as a whole, as well as a specific population, which is Global Community. Global Civilization has the power to make the laws of the land and to make the rules for the territory of the Earth. Global Law has been and continue to be researched and developed for this purpose.

The following backgroung information was taken from the Global Constitution Global Constitution. These passages give us the processes by which we can create a biodiversity zone in the North.

As described in the Global Constitution Chapter 6.3.2 Rights, responsibilities and accountabilities, Article 13 ff: Global Rights

Part 48. We are all members of Global Community. We all have the duty to protect the rights and welfare of all species and all people. No humans have the right to encroach on the ecological space of other species and other people, or treat them with cruelty and violence.

Part 49. All species, humans and cultures have intrinsic worth. They are subjects, not objects of manipulation or ownership. No humans have the right to own other species, other people or the knowledge of other cultures through patents and other intellectual property rights.

Part 50. Defending biological and cultural diversity is a duty of all people. Diversity is an end in itself, a value, a source of richness both material and cultural.

Part 51. All members of Global Community including all humans have the right to sustenance -- to food and water, to safe and clean habitat, to security of ecological space. These rights are natural rights, they are birthrights given by the fact of existence on earth and are best protected through community rights and commons. They are not given by states or corporations, nor can they be extinguished by state or corporate action. No state or corporation has the right to erode or undermine these natural rights or enclose the commons that sustain all through privatisation or monopoly control.

Chapter 10.2 ss Change our ways of doing things, and our ways of doing business, as per the Scale of Global Rights Article 3: Scale of Global Rights

In summary, Canada found evident that the ecological base is the essential prerequisite for the effectiveness and exercise of all rights recognized for human beings. The stewardship of the ecological base has to be given priority before the fulfilment of various economic and social wishes. Demands resulting from the socio-economic system of a particular country have to find their limits in the protection of the global ecosystem. Vital interests of future generations have to be considered as having priority before less vital interests of the present generation. Supply chains have to be designed in a way, that the goods can enter after usage or consumption into natural or industrial recycling processes. If serious damages to persons, animals, plants and the ecosystem cannot be excluded, an action or pattern of behaviour should be refrained from. A measure for supplying goods or services should choose a path which entails the least possible impact on the ecological and social system concerned. This way functioning proven systems will not be disturbed, and unnecessary risks will not be taken. Supply strategies consuming less resources should have preference before those enhancing more resource consumption. When there is a need to find a solution to a problem or a concern, a sound solution would be to choose a measure or conduct an action, if possible, which causes reversible damage as opposed to a measure or an action causing an irreversible loss.

We are all members of Global Civilization. We all have the duty to protect the rights and welfare of all species and all people. No humans have the right to encroach on the ecological space of other species and other people, or treat them with cruelty and violence. All life species, humans and cultures, have intrinsic worth. They are subjects, not commodities, not objects of manipulation or ownership. No humans have the right to own other species, other people or the knowledge of other cultures through patents and other intellectual property rights. Defending biological and cultural diversity is a duty of all people. Diversity is an end in itself, a value, a source of richness both material and cultural. All members of Global Community including all humans have the right to food and water, to safe and clean habitat, to security of ecological space. These rights are natural rights, they are birthrights given by the fact of existence on Earth and are best protected through global community rights and global commons. They are not given by states or corporations, nor can they be extinguished by state or corporate action. No state or corporation has the right to erode or undermine these natural rights or enclose the commons that sustain all through privatisation or monopoly control.

Canada’s Arctic territory and waters have been given increasing attention because of:

The Arctic contains an estimated one-quarter of the world’s undiscovered energy resources, that is up to 50 per cent of the Earth’s remaining undiscovered reserves of hydrocarbons are located north of 60°n latitude.

Impacts of the global warming of the planet.

Climate change is a result of the rising global temperatures associated with global warming, the effects of which have a direct impact on fragile ecosystems. It is contributing to the melting of the polar ice caps and that will open the Northwest Passage to increased shipping activity.

Beside the global warming of the planet, there is another factor that contributes to warming of the waters in the Arctic It is the increase in discharge rates from melting glaciers. This runoff is much warmer than the Arctic Ocean water. The net result is a slight warming of the Arctic Ocean waters and a dilution of salinity.

The Polar Regions are very sensitive indicators of global warming. These regions are highly vulnerable to rising temperatures and may be virtually ice free by the summer of 2030. Because sea ice has a bright surface, the majority of solar energy that hits it is reflected back into space. When sea ice melts, the dark-coloured ocean surface is exposed. Solar energy is then absorbed rather than reflected, so the oceans get warmer and temperatures rise, making it difficult for new ice to form.

Northwest Passage

In the past the Northwest Passage has been practically impassable because it was covered by thick, year-round sea ice. However, satellite and other monitoring confirm that the Arctic sea ice has been declining in both thickness and size. For over a decade, satellite images taken near the end of the Arctic summer often show that large portions of the Northwest Passage are almost ice free. In September of 2006, these images showed that the Arctic Ocean was free to sail directly to the North Pole from northern Europe. In the summer of 2007, the area covered by sea ice in the Arctic has shrunk to its lowest level. There was a drop of 1 million sq km of ice cover in just one year. The Northwest Passage was opened for sailing. This extreme reduction in just one year indicates that the summer ice may disappear much sooner than expected, and that Canada urgently needs to understand better the processes involved.

If it were to become more accessible to navigation and for longer portions of the year, the Northwest Passage would represent a potentially attractive and valuable commercial shipping route. The economic value of a short waterway connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans was the subject of many early dreams.

The impacts of climate change heighten disputes over the status of the Northwest Passage. All water routes through the Northwest Passage pass between the islands of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. On that basis, Canada claims the Northwest Passage as Canadian Internal Waters, and thus fall under Canadian jurisdiction and control. And that means Canada has the right to set the rules over who gets to go through. A key concern is to avoid letting unsafe vessels sally through the Northwest Passage and risk a devastating oil spill in the fragile Arctic ecosystem that Canada would have to do the clean up.

Several countries, including the United States and Europe, have claimed that the Northwest Passage is an international strait that should be governed by the world's shipping community, not by Canada alone.

However, this claim has been disputed, especially by the United States and the European Union. They argued that the Northwest Passage represents international waters, which allows the right of transit passage, and that the strait ought to be governed by the world's shipping community, not by Canada alone. In such a régime, Canada would have the right to enact fishing and environmental regulation, and fiscal and smuggling laws, as well as laws intended for the safety of shipping, but not the right to close the Northwest Passage.

In 1988, however, Canada and the United States forged an agreement on Arctic Cooperation, which pledges that voyages of U.S. icebreakers will be undertaken with the consent of the Government of Canada. The agreement did not alter either country’s legal position vis-à-vis the Arctic waters. With regard to the United States’ legal position, however, there have been some suggestions that U.S. concerns with continental security since the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001 could dampen its assertions that Canada’s Arctic waters constitute an international waterway. Accordingly, Canada might be wise to manage the Northwest Passage as a way of securing the North American perimeter.

Protectionist sentiments apply to both Canada and the US when it comes to the Northwest Passage but for Canada, the concern for Arctic sovereignty is deep-seated. The claim of sovereignty over the artic archipelago is uniquely tied to Canada’s sense of national pride and identity and therefore, any suggestions or actions that endanger the government’s exclusive authority over the disputed territory sparks an emotional and defensive response. Canada’s sovereignty in the Arctic embraces land, sea and ice. It extends without interruption to the seaward - facing coasts of the Arctic islands. These islands are joined by the waters between them. Inuit people have used and occupied the ice as they have used and occupied the land.

The difficulty for Canada is that many, including the Americans believe insufficient resources and personnel have been dedicated to the Arctic to demonstrate a significant presence thereby weakening its sovereignty claim. Weak resources translate into a weak claim.

During the Cold War, lacking the finances and manpower, Canada had little choice but to turn to the United States for military presence and weapons. These collaborative defence efforts to guard against a common nuclear threat, while maximizing Canada’s security, also maximized Canada’s potential loss of sovereignty. This fact has not been forgotten.

It all means that Canada and Nunavut must invite and help settlers from around the world to come to Nunavut. It is the only way Canada can use the 'community' card in its claim of sovereighty and of ownership of the land and of all its natural resources, including the control of the Northwest Passage.

Increased navigation and commercial use of the Northwest Passage create several environmental risks. The Arctic ecosystem is very fragile and the fauna strongly depends on the ice for its survival. The seasonal ice that serves as a hunting platform for coastal communities is very sensitive to heavy traffic. Even the icebreaker Amundsen is a source of concern.

There are risks concerning eventual accidents, such as oil spills and groundings in the Northwest Passage. Canada has duties and responsibilities to the ecosystem and the Inuit. After the first voyage of the Manhattan and the realization that it could be the start of an international navigation practice, Canada searched for ways to, above all, protect the delicate environment of the Northwest Passage. Even though the Manhattan supertanker was empty of oil when it was damaged on its first voyage, and quite seriously damaged, the Canadian government realized that legislation had to be passed to protect the North from environmental damage. In fact, the Government of Canada has created the Canada’s Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act.

The Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act was a truly novel response to the potential crisis. The Act enabled Canada to exercise jurisdiction over shipping in the Northwest Passage in order to protect the Arctic marine environment but it did not, in any way, change the position of Canada with respect to their claim of sovereignty over the Northwest Passage.

At the time of the first Manhattan voyage, the Canadian public, the media and the opposition cried foul and demanded more concrete action by the government to protect its sovereignty. At the time, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, however, resisted this pressure in favour of a Canadian liberal internationalist ideology. The Act was seen as a vital tool to protect the distinctive way of life of Canada’s northern communities. Conceived by Jean Chrétien, the sole purpose of the Act was to establish a one hundred-mile wide Arctic pollution control zone measured outward from the nearest Canadian land in which environmental controls to shipping practices and the protection of the marine environment were to be enforced by Canada. This legislation was necessary because of the danger posed by oil-laden tankers that could spill their contents thus permanently damaging the fragile Arctic environment. Such actions could not be considered “innocent”. The 100-mile limit was chosen as it was compatible with international legal standards applicable to oil pollution from tankers. The thinking was: if states could defend themselves against armed attack, why not environmental attack? At a time when the world was only beginning to think about environmental protection issues, this legislation was particularly avant-garde in its custodianship concept. The Act was generally accepted by the international community.

After several multilateral conferences and meetings, Canada was able to get acceptance of its idea of custodianship to the world. Few nations recognized the US’s strong legal argument to designate the Northwest Passage as an international waterway, and Canada secured enough international support especially amongst the circumpolar Scandinavian states of Sweden, Norway, Iceland and most importantly, the Soviet Union, to reject the US international claim for a Canadian claim focused on custodianship and exceptionalism. Eventually, Canada’s thinking behind its Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act with its emphasis on the uniqueness of the Arctic translated into the arctic exception - Article 234 that was adopted by the final UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, December 10, 1982. Article 234 is shown below:
"Coastal States have the right to adopt and enforce non-discriminatory laws and regulations for the prevention, reduction and control of marine pollution from vessels in ice-covered areas within the limits of the exclusive economic zone, where particularly severe climatic conditions and the presence of ice covering such areas for most of the year create obstructions or exceptional hazards to navigation, and pollution of the marine environment could cause major harm to or irreversible disturbance of the ecological balance. Such laws and regulations shall have due regard to navigation and the protection and preservation of the marine environment based on the best available scientific evidence."

Canada had obtained environmental protection for the Northwest Passage without having to raise the sovereignty issue. This is further evidence of Canada’s assertion that the Northwest Passage is part of Canada’s internal waters. Canada has in fact staged the first global step toward the Earth management of natural resources. Earth management is something Global Civilization has been promoting ever since 1985.

Expanding Global Civilization collaboration on conservation and innovation.

Over the last decade, world economies have faced growing challenges in increasingly competitive and globalized world markets. Trade in certain sectors—such as natural resources, agriculture, energy, and consumer products have been a source of disagreement among all countries has created continuing tension in worldwide commercial relationships.

The development of new technologies and conservation strategies is essential both to reduce pollution and to make the most of worldwide resource strengths.

Some of the proposals include:

Arctic Council

Regardless of sovereignty, protection of the environment is key and Canada’s Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act does not cover many forms of natural pollution. Which means that any exploitation of resources via use of the Northwest Passage will not only impact Canada but also the other circumpolar states. Recognizing the limits of its pollution act, Canada has been a leader in establishing multilateral discussions amongst the various nations to discuss common threats and concerns. In Finland in 1996, the eight circumpolar states established an Arctic Council - an intergovernmental forum in which issues and concerns related to the environment, sustainable development, as well as social and economic considerations are addressed. This council can only function by putting sovereignty to the side in order to tackle the wider and common concerns of Canada, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden and the United States.

The danger of such an approach to protecting the environment, and the Earth's life support systems, is very obvious. It does not work, never did. The world has seen how the United Nations (UN) has operated since its formation in 1945. The UN makes decisions, talks a lot, but never has the power to truly protect life in any significant ways. The UN is simply a bureaucratic organization very good for diplomatic purposes but it is not a good model to replace Canada sovereignty and protecting the north polar region. Canada has no need of the Arctic Council. Only Canada can protect its sovereignty. Only Canada can and should do the work. With help from Russia and the U.S.A, Canada can be and should be the overseer and custodian of north polar region.

Canada is best capable of preserving environmental quality and natural resources, accommodating environmental protection principals with the needs and traditions of Arctic Native peoples, monitoring environmental conditions, and reducing and eventually eliminating pollution in the Arctic Environment.

As per the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act, all vessels in the Northwest Passage are subjected to search for pollution control verification purposes; this way would-be terrorists, smugglers and criminals might consider an alternate route. Currently, vessels voluntarily declare their adherence to the conditions of the Act.

The Canadian Navy does not currently have the capacity to operate within the Arctic ice. Canada requires more all-season icebreaker capabilities in order to properly monitor and patrol the area.

Because the Cold War is over, protection of the North is not as urgent as it once was simply because the proximity of Russia to the US and Canada no longer represents an immediate threat. However, since the events of 9/11, the US and Canada focus is on continental security. The US would be unwise to aggravate relations with Canada at a time when cooperation is needed. The US should, therefore, abandon its insistence the Northwest Passage be designated an international strait in favour of Canadian control through its Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act in order to complete a security perimeter around the North. The US would be better served in the long run by abandoning its international strait argument and courting Canada for preferential treatment. In political terms, this would be referred to as a harmonization of policies.

The requirements of an international sea waterway are both geographic and functional.

An international sea waterway must connect two bodies of the high seas, in this case the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, and must also satisfy the criterion of being a useful route for navigation, and must have experienced a sufficient number of transits. Considering the International Court of Justice’s ruling in the Corfu Channel Case, it becomes readily available that this criterion fails to be met in the case of the Northwest Passage, as there has not yet been a sufficient number of transits to qualify it as a useful route for international maritime traffic. However, if a sufficient number of vessels transit the Northwest Passage without seeking Canadian permission, Canada’s claims to the legal status of the Northwest Passage could be challenged, as there would be an increasing claim and perception that the Northwest Passage constitutes an international sea waterway. This international status would limit Canada’s ability to control these waters, especially in terms of rules governing environmental issues and shipping practices, which would potentially be governed by the International Maritime Organization. Most agree that ensuring control requires a stronger Government of Canada presence in the region, to monitor the Northwest Passage and ensure compliance with Canadian sovereign claims.

The definition of sovereignty helps in understanding Canada's position. Sovereignty implies control, authority over a territory. The concept of state sovereignty is embedded in international law. Traditionally, this definition reflects a state’s right to jurisdictional control, territorial integrity, and non-interference by outside states. Sovereignty implies both undisputed supremacy over the land’s inhabitants and independence from unwanted intervention by an outside authority.

However, sovereignty has also been increasingly defined in terms of state responsibility. This includes a state’s exercise of control and authority over its territory, and the perception of this control and authority by other states. Sovereignty is thus linked to the maintenance of international security. Former National Defence Minister Bill Graham has stated that 'Sovereignty is a question of exercising, actively, your responsibilities in an area'.

Another important dimension of the assertion of Canadian sovereignty includes stewardship, an issue that has been raised by Canada’s northern Inuit and Aboriginal peoples. Specifically, use and occupancy by Canada’s northern inhabitants is significant in terms of the validity of Canada’s sovereign claims.

Canada’s legal position is sound today but as the ice melts, there is the genuine fear that this sovereignty will float away with the pack ice. However there are actions that can be taken and factors that could mitigate against a legal challenge.

In 1951, the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) ruling on the Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway), is particularly important for Canada because the ruling shown some direction regarding jurisdiction of states over waters adjacent to their coasts. This ruling:
"recognized the concept of historic title to coastal waters, and accepted a new method of measurement of territorial seas that Canada preferred.

This new method of calculation introduced the concept of straight baselines. Rather than following the outline of a country’s land mass, as was the more traditional method, the straight baseline method allows a country with offshore islands and/or very jagged coastlines to calculate its territorial seas from straight lines drawn from a point on the coast to the islands or from island to island. One then connects the dots literally and the water behind the lines is designated internal waters while waters away from the line and toward open waters are considered territorial seas. Hence the term straight baseline. The old method of measurement (which is still used and favoured by the US) simply calculated the territorial seas from a baseline not exceeding twelve nautical miles from shore that traced the outline of the coast. Therefore the baseline would exactly match the seacoast (but twelve miles out toward sea). The area encompassing a country’s internal waters can be greatly increased by adopting the new method of calculation thus increasing the amount of water deemed internal and under the full authority and sovereignty of the coastal state.

The coastal state may pass laws it deems fit to control traffic and more importantly, no foreign ship may claim automatic right of passage.

This method of calculation was reinforced seven years later at the first United Nations (UN) Conference on the Law of the Sea. Canada, however, had still not adopted any national legislation to formally claim a historic right to the Northwest Passage because, the new jurisprudence was considered quite radical and, at the time, Canada was more preoccupied with protecting Canada’s fishing industry. As well, the anticipated reaction from the US to any formalizing of a Canadian position that the waters of the Arctic Archipelago were internal waters of Canada discouraged precipitate action.

The Arctic region has featured prominently in debates about Canadian sovereignty. Canada’s identity and well-being as a country must not rest solely with ownership of the Northwest Passage . There has been a renewed focus on the Arctic due to the effects of climate change in the region, notably the melting of the polar ice caps. At the same time, there are continuing strategic issues relating to potential incursions into Canadian Arctic territory at various levels – airspace, surface (terrestrial and maritime), and sub-surface (by nuclear submarines). Canada’s ability to detect and monitor such territorial incursions and to enforce sovereign claims over its Arctic territory in such cases has been questioned. Canada’s identity needs to include monitoring of the Northwest Passage, and drawing new legislation for enforcement of Canadian sovereignty.

The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS)

Other countries, including the United States, Russia, Denmark, Japan, and Norway, as well as the European Union, have expressed increasing interest in the region and differing claims in relation to international law. As the ice melts, the shipping route through Canada’s Arctic waters will be open to increased shipping activity in the coming decades. Canada’s assertion that the Northwest Passage represents internal, territorial waters has been challenged by other countries, including the United States, which argue that these waters constitute an international waterway. Interest in the region’s economic potential has resulted in discussions of increased resource exploration and disputed sub-surface resources, as well as concerns over environmental degradation, control and regulation of shipping activities, and protection of northern inhabitants. It is important to note that the Arctic is a vast and remote territory that presents many difficulties in terms of surveillance, regulation, and infrastructure development.

Canada and the United States have disputed the maritime boundary in the Beaufort Sea, an area that potentially has strong oil and gas resources. Exploration licences and competing claims to jurisdiction could be an ongoing issue. Canada has committed $51 million to map and identify the boundary of its continental shelf in the Arctic, pursuant to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Canada ratified the UNCLOS in 2003 and has 10 years from that date to determine the extent of its continental shelf. This mapping will help to determine Canada’s exact sovereign rights in terms of economic control (beyond the UNCLOS - defined 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone) and resource exploration. The United States has not ratified the UNCLOS, despite a vote in 2004 by the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee recommending ratification.