If Canada and the US are really friendly / allies etc., why does the US insist on arguing Canada's sovriegnty?

Question

over the Northwest Passage? I understand why Russia would interfere as they are Russia, but why does the US persist in trying to get passage ownership to what is clearly Canada's? It's not the St Lawrence here, it's going through the middle of Canada. What's the rational for this arguement?

Answer 1

The northwest passage would be a fantastic gateway to ship Alaskan oil.  With Canadian ownership this practice would at a minimum be under heavy restriction due to the fact that the passage boarders upon protected arctic ecosystems.   It is quite likely that using this passage as a foreign shipping route would be prohibited, by permit only and carry a heavy fee.

Answer 2

I am not entirely familiar with this specific situation but hopefully I can clear up confusion over sovereignty and coastal waters. There are 3 specific categories for waterways bordering countries. There is the territorial sea which extends 12 nautical miles from the coast line ( certain exceptions apply) Then there is the contiguous zone which extends 12 nautical miles from the territorial zone's end. And then begins the Exclusive Economic Zone which extends for 200 nautical miles from the coast line. According to the United Nations Convention on the Laws of the Sea III, international waters do not begin until after the exclusive economic zone which means at 200.0001 nautical miles out, international waters begin. Now the states (countries) have almost all signed treaties and ratified the treaties to allow for "safe passage"  across their contiguous zone and territorial zone. But the controlling states have jurisdiction in the territorial sea but may not board a ship unless permission is given or a request is made by the ship. The meaning of exclusive economic zone is that, the state it is controlled by is in control of the economics of that zone and may (by law and treaty) control the fishing,harvesting, or drilling of any resources in that zone. Therefore it is safe to conclude that when boundaries are disputed and fish and resources are on the line countries want to get what they think is theirs and we will continue to argue with Canada until a compromise can be reached.

Answer 3

It is simple!  Look up the North American Union.  This is a documented plan to dissolve Canada, Mexico, and USA and create a central union.

If we are trying to control this passage it has something to do with oil or money.  If you control the passage of goods or oil you can manipulate the process to your liking.  Believe me, it will not be because it is good for the US.  It is in the interest of some special interest groups!  

Answer 4

Cause America HAS  the busy body neighbor problem

.

Always trying to tell everybody how to plant the tree or paint the house

.

Cause America thinks it know how to do every thing

.

  

Answer 5

The US isn't seeking ownership, it's a question of "Freedom of the Seas" and "right of free passage." It's no different than the straits of Hormuz, or the straights of Gibraltar.  

The US claim is that the passage is international waters. Looking at a map, I tend to agree with Canada. What it will eventually come down to is can Canada defend the passage. If you can't or won't it doesn't really matter.  

Answer 6

Money and if it does become an open sea than does international water policy apply?  

Answer 7

It's the Bush white House, they're trying to claim ownership of the entire planet.

Answer 8

Arrogance, pure and simple.