The issue in question is the deployment of a system of active sonar by the US Navy. This system comprises a method by which modern enemy submarines could be detected if they attempt to approach our coasts. The Navy's claim is that it would like to deploy this system in order to help protect the US from such submarines, which could theoretically be owned by any country which could afford to manufacture or purchase them. This is, in other words, intended as a general means of protection for the United States against offensive technology that is now in use.

Sonar has historically been the main means by which submarines have been detected. Initially, submarines used fairly noisy diesel engines, and the function of sonar was simply to detect such noises. Later, submarine engines became quieter, often powered by small nuclear reactors. Sonar then became "active sonar," which is to say, it actually sent sound out into the water and attempted to detect reflections of that sound coming off of enemy submarines. Modern submarines, however, are actually designed so that sonar pings do not reflect off of them very effectively. As such, a very sophisticated, carefully designed system of sonar is necessary for their detection.

On the surface, one would tend to think that no fault could possibly be found with the Navy's project. However, upon the idea's introduction, environmentalists were quick to point out that the effects such a system would have on the world's marine populations has not been widely studied, and that a great deal of harm could potentially come to many ocean-dwelling species as a result of its deployment.

As such, the two parties involved are: