Slashdot Mirror
Coast Guard to Track Ships Using Buoys
nomrniceguy writes "The Coast Guard plans to use dozens of buoys off the U.S. coast to extend the reach of a security system that monitors large vessels heading in and out of ports. The buoys are intended to extend the network's reach -- the Guard now receives the automated data only when a vessel is within about 25 miles of a port. The floating transmitters will relay the information from hundreds of miles off shore, from the middle of Lake Superior and off coastlines from Alaska to Maine."
I was under the impression that the US had spent billions of dollars seeding the north atlantic ocean with passive buoys and magnetic anomaly detectors (MAD) as a net to detect and triangulate soviet subs. This is cold war stuff that could perfectly be reused to counter new threats from terrorism, since it's been there and working for decades and, presumably, still in operation. So why deploy new ones?
(1) The US claims 200 miles as the Economic Exclusion Zone. International Waters off the US Coast begin there. (2) The rules (by the way, there are rules that govern international waters and the High Seas) that govern salvage rights would not apply to a buoy because it is anchored to the sea floor. (3) We're not talking about international waters or something "adrift." (4) The "enterprising young person" that undertakes what you've suggested will have a serious problem dealing with one of these buoys in the first place. They are likely larger than any boat a "young person" could afford. Even if they could deal with the size, anchor, and chain and so on, the authorities would likely releave them of what we call their liberty. (5) Don't forget the USCG and the USN. The Captains know the rules and have the ability to enforce them.
Territorial waters extends only 12 nautical miles, yes.
However, there are several other factors under international law.
First, the Exclusive Economic Zone extends to 200 nautical miles. In this zone, "[t]he coastal State may, in the exercise of its sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage the living resources in the exclusive economic zone, [and] take such measures, including boarding, inspection, arrest and judicial proceedings, as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by it in conformity with this Convention."
Second, international law does not merely permit, but requires countries to repress the slave trade, piracy, narcotics trafficing, and unauthorized broadcasting on the high seas (that is, the portion of the ocean outside of national jurisdiction).
Third, all ships on the high seas either fly the flag of a soverign nation and are subject to its laws, or are "without nationality" -- and in the latter case, they are subject to boarding by any state's warships at any time, the lack of nationality itself being sufficient reason.
None of this is new; the first is in the Convention of the Law of the Sea and goes back 25 years, while the international precedents for the second and third date to the ninteenth century and even earlier.
By the way, note that since piracy is, under the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea and other international precedents, "any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed . . . against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State", it would be piracy to shoot these buoys even if they were on the high seas instead of in the U.S.'s EEZ. At which point every nation on Earth is obligated to cooperate in your capture.