Saw the day before yesterday a documentary about the continental shelf and its outer limits.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/continental_shelf_description.htm
And there is also a tricky clause in it:
"According to article 76, the coastal State may establish the outer limits of its juridical continental shelf wherever the continental margin extends beyond 200 nautical miles by establishing the foot of the continental slope, by meeting the requirements  of article 76, paragraphs 4 - 7, of the Convention"
Some picture to explain the requirement:


And about the international commission to investigate the claims:
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm

And about the purpose and the function of the commission:
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/commission_purpose.htm

I don't know why but the link about an article about the difficulties don't appears:

But now it suddenly appeared and my additional text is lost:
http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1751&context=cilj

 I start again with my additional text:
In the documentary they said that Russia in 2002 was the first to ask for an extension of the 200 nautical miles...
They spoke also about a tiny Japanese coral Island at sea level, which tended to be immersed by the higher sea levels. There was an Japanese scientists who found to build coral in laboratorium and it can be used to build coral on large scale among others on this tiny island to bring it again above sea level...
Don't laugh, because according to the international laws cited above, this tiny island can furnish for about, if I rememember it well, some three quarters of the Japanese land surface...as under national jurisdiction...
France with its islands is also privileged...some 80 times of the surface of the Hexagone...
And we have not yet spoken of the Chinese claims...

But the real worth of all that water above the continental shelf is raw materials, oil, gas and so on...miliards of dollars or whatever money you want...

There is also a commission of the UN for the high seas and they are in conflict with the other commission to defend the rights of the international community...

Is there a new ground of conflict lurking at the horizon...? As the famous American admiral said, who possesses the seas...

Kind regards, Paul.

Addendum to the previous message.

About the American admiral, who said:
"in Mahan's dictum that whatever power rules the sea also ruled the world"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Thayer_Mahan

Kind regards, Paul.

Potential disputes regarding any oil and gas reserves in the Arctic Ocean;




Russian mini-sub plants flag on the ocean bed at the North Pole;

The Spratly Islands in the South China Sea are another area of dispute;




China has been building artificial islands in the South China Sea;

You are quite right Triceratops to mention the discussions.
It are essentially China and Russia who are disputing their exclusive economic zones.
And if the extension of the continental shelf is allowed they can legally claim a 350 nautical miles zone...
If every country does that what will be over of the high seas...?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone
This additional KM2 seems to be added in the wiki as "Shelf" KM2...?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_shelf


And what is over from the high seas. "Mare liberum" in Latin...?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_waters

But they aren't free anymore either. And as I see it that is a good thing as a preservation of the heritage of humankind...
https://goo.gl/zlvnXq
https://goo.gl/iRx2Cq
http://www.cfr.org/world/united-nations-convention-high-seas/p21072
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/ioc-oceans/priority-areas/rio-20-ocean/single-view/news/high_stakes_for_the_high_seas/#.V1c1nN9f0dV
http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/bbnj/prepcom1/


Kind regards from your friend Paul.

It's not just China claiming sovereignty over uninhabited rocks. The UK, for example, claims sovereignty over Rockall which sits in the North Atlantic 163 miles west of St Kilda. The only other country which has voiced an opinion on Rockall is Ireland which rejects the UK claim while not claiming the rock for itself.

In the 1970s (at the time of the rush for North Sea oil and gas) the Irish band The Wolfe Tones wrote a song about Rockall. It's a rather silly, rebel-style piece which, for example, conflates 'England' with Britain with reference to Rockall and the Isle of Man, neither of which have ever been part of either England or part of Ireland for that matter. (That said - there is some evidence that Man may have been ruled by Ulster and/or Dalriada in the 6th Century.)



 Beyond the historical silliness, however, it's actually quite a fun song and with a catchy tune.

The positions/extent of the various national economic zones for oil and gas in the North Sea are very interesting. Geologically the North Sea is essentially a very ancient rift valley, long since buried under later sedimentary deposits. The faults associated with this rifting are what created the traps or pockets in which the oil subsequently accumulated. Here's a map of the major oil (blue) and gas (red) fields in the North Sea, notice how the oil fields in particular all lie down the middle of the sea, essentially following the line down the middle of the ancient Mezosoic rift valley:




It is just lucky chance (for the UK) that the modern coastlines, which were used to determine the extent of each nation's claim to the seafloor, allowed the UK to have any oil fields at all. If the median, midline boundary between the UK and Norway/Denmark/Netherlands was shifted just a little westwards, or conversely had the 100 million-year-old faults occurred just a little further to the east, the UK might well have had virtually no offshore oil at all (and so be like like Belgium and France who, through the vagaries of geology, have no oil in their sectors).

A further important point, relevant to the current EU referendum, is the Brexit claim that Britain could regain control of "its" fishing rights up to the full 200 mile limit. Assuming this claim doesn't mean that British trawlers will start fishing up the River Seine, one has to acknowledge that this limit would generally have to follow an agreed midline between the UK and France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Ireland, and so for the most part would be considerably less than 200 miles out from the British mainland. Furthermore most of the UK's major fisheries are located around Scotland, and control and management of these offshore fisheries has already been devolved to the Scottish Parliament (within the limits of the EU common fisheries policy). So should the UK exit the EU, and then Scotland become independent (whether in the EU or not), England would still not have control, nor possibly even access, to the most important fishing areas around the British Isles. And of course fish tend to move around a lot with their spawning grounds often being in completely different places from their feeding and breeding grounds, ... neither do they pay any attention to arbitary lines drawn on maps. Hence all the more reason why a unified international fishing policy is essential to prevent over-fishing.

Vizzer wrote:

It's not just China claiming sovereignty over uninhabited rocks. The UK, for example, claims sovereignty over Rockall which sits in the North Atlantic 163 miles west of St Kilda. The only other country which has voiced an opinion on Rockall is Ireland which rejects the UK claim while not claiming the rock for itself.

Vizzer,

yes for raw materials, oil and gas no one is better than the other. Look at Argentina about the Falklands...And France as the greatest possessor of off-shore territory is so keen to support the local population of the tiny islands with the goal of not bring that population on the idea of independence from the "motherland"...
A friend of the grandson, a Belgian doctor, is doing now for the second time a service on two different islands of the French overseas territories, paid by the French government

Kind regards from your friend Paul.

Ah yes, France. While Britain regards Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands as semi-independent, self-determining overseas territories ... France's overseas territories - French Guiana, Guadaloupe, Martinique, Réunion, Mayotte - are all actually considered part of France itself. They use Euro currency and French law; the populations are French citizens and have French passports; they send Deputies (MPs) to the French National Senate (Parliament); and interestingly, since they are legally départements of France, they are all part of the European Union, and so currently any EU citizen - whether British, Belgian, Bulgarian, Greek or German - has the right to move to, live, retire or set up business there, whilst being fully protected by common EU law and rights.
 
Interestingly also therefore, should there ever be foreign aggression or invasion ... of say, Guadaloupe in the Caribbean, (admittedly an unlikely event, but perhaps something like the 1983 US invasion of the ex-British territory of Grenada) ... it would be deemed a direct attack on France itself, and so strictly France could call upon its NATO allies for a combined military response.

Meles meles wrote:

Ah yes, France. While Britain regards Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands as semi-independent, self-determining overseas territories ... France's overseas territories - French Guiana, Guadaloupe, Martinique, Réunion, Mayotte - are all actually considered part of France itself. They use Euro currency and French law; the populations are French citizens and have French passports; they send Deputies (MPs) to the French National Senate (Parliament); and interestingly, since they are legally départements of France, they are all part of the European Union, and so currently any EU citizen - whether British, Belgian, Bulgarian, Greek or German - has the right to move to, live, retire or set up business there, whilst being fully protected by common EU law and rights.
 
Interestingly also therefore, should there ever be foreign aggression or invasion ... of say, Guadaloupe in the Caribbean, (admittedly an unlikely event, but perhaps something like the 1983 US invasion of the ex-British territory of Grenada) ... it would be deemed a direct attack on France itself, and so strictly France could call upon its NATO allies for a combined military response.

Meles meles,

that's all very true.
And by the way the Belgian doctor I mentioned in my previous message has first practised in Mayotte and is now in Martinique. 
The grandchildren will visit him and his wife this year...

Kind regards from your friend Paul.

UN tribunal rejects China claim;

UN

Yes Triceratops but China don't listen and as they have as Russia a veto in the UN...but perhaps it will be a "moral" boost for the "Westerners"...? And some legitimation for further actions...?

Regards from your friend Paul.