LOST Is Right

The U.S. should steer clear of the Law of the Sea treaty

ON June 29, 1982, President Reagan decided at a meeting of his National Security Council not to sign the Law of the Sea treaty. He opposed it “even without its seabed mining provisions,” as he confided to his diary that night. Four months later, the president took a further step to deep-six the treaty. In October 1982, he sent Donald Rumsfeld abroad to persuade America’s allies to join Washington in “rejecting the deep-sea mining provisions” of what is known as either UNCLOS (the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea) or, more brutally, LOST (the Law of the Sea).

About the Author

John O’Sullivan

John O’Sullivan is a senior fellow at National Review Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.

Featured Tags

The U.S. should steer clear of the Law of the Sea treaty

ON June 29, 1982, President Reagan decided at a meeting of his National Security Council not to sign the Law of the Sea treaty. He opposed it “even without its seabed mining provisions,” as he confided to his diary that night. Four months later, the president took a further step to deep-six the treaty. In October 1982, he sent Donald Rumsfeld abroad to persuade America’s allies to join Washington in “rejecting the deep-sea mining provisions” of what is known as either UNCLOS (the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea) or, more brutally, LOST (the Law of the Sea).