• flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Stick to the point, though. This is a dick move (increasing the territorial claims, that is - not pointing out whataboutism, that’s all good!)

    • guitars are real@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I did some reading and while it’s true that the continued existence of the US federal government is a large collection of dick moves forming one gigantic meta-dick move, this is actually pretty straightforward. The UN Convention on the Law of the Seas defines a range of distances from the seashore where a state can claim the seafloor/minerals etc as its own; everything past that is the high seas. The US hadn’t previously maxed out its claims, so there was wiggle room under UNCLOS to expand said claims.

      Now, why would they bother, why is it suddenly worth the extra administrative cost of claiming even deeper offshore waters, that’s an interesting question. I’d say it’s a good indicator of the increasing cost and difficulty of extracting natural resources (likely technology has brought the cost down some, too), pushing nation-states to pursue ever more exotic and costly extraction methods, but overall this doesn’t seem that significant (we all already knew that was a trend, that’s why we’re all on this community).

      The push to expand territories is a troubling one, because sure, this is a legally uncontroversial move, but if expanding territories is at this point our best option for propping up the system, we’re in for another era of wars. But we all knew that already.

      • Skua@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        It should be noted that claim is not the same as the better-known exclusive economic zone. The continental shelf thing is only for seabed resources, not stuff in the water column. But that’s all that the US is claiming, so it is indeed in line with UNCLOS

      • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I’d argue that expanding the zones a bit doesn’t incur costs other than updating some maps, as existing radar systems etc were already reaching into the newly claimed areas, undoubtedly.

        Am I worried about my country’s creeping reach, and have I suddenly realized there’s yet another way to slowly encroach on territory? Yes.

        E: why the downvotes?

        • guitars are real@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          policing a space/securing it for industry costs. They didn’t change the maps just to feel good about themselves, this is only the first step to opening these spaces up for exploitation.

          If nothing else, they need a presence to help the companies quash unionization efforts on the mining rigs, don’t they? And that costs.