The Irrelevance of Non-Recognition to Australia's Antarctic Territory Title

Abstract

It is often noted that few States recognize the seven national claims to Antarctic territory. Australia, one of the claimants, asserts title over 42 per cent of the continent and yet only four States have recognized its claim. Some States have expressly rejected Australia's claim. This article examines the legal significance of such widespread non-recognition. It does so through interrogating the evolution of the legal regime of territorial acquisition, its historical function and application to Antarctica, and relevant decisions of international courts and tribunals. The article identifies, and distinguishes amongst, several categories of non-recognition and considers the relevance of each. The analysis finds that the seemingly meagre level of recognition of Australia's title to the Australian Antarctic Territory does not detract from the validity of that title. This article points to possible reasons as to why a number of polar scholars may have suggested otherwise.

The Kerguelen Plateau: Interactions between the Law of the Sea and the Antarctic Treaty

“…As discussed, Article 4 of the Antarctic Treaty effectively diffuses disputes over territorial claims and has allowed Australia's claim to the AAT to endure since 1961, despite a lack of universal recognition (Scott, 2021). This dispute settlement is fundamental to maintaining peace in Antarctica, and therefore provoking any new or revisited disputes over the AAT would have not only have been disruptive to Australia, but the entire geopolitics of Antarctica, and it was thus a key consideration in the manner in which Australia addressed the issue of the AAT ECS.…”