This Comment critiques the United States\u27 refusal to sign the Convention, based on its contention that the International Sea-Bed Authority (ISA) decision-making process fails to proportionately protect its interests in deep sea mining. The author examines the underlying purpose of UNCLOS III and the divergent political and economic interests of the participants in deep sea mining. The author further examines the decision-making process of the ISA in order to determine which interests are represented and protected by the system, and compares this system to other international means. The author argues that the United States\u27 should sign the Convention, as its interests will be better served within the ISA framework rather than relying on a series of bilateral agreements or obsolete customary law
