The political origins of the Antarctic Treaty

Abstract

Like many great institutions, the Antarctic Treaty system has its own creation myth, according to which it was brought into being by the Antarctic science programme of the 1957–1958 International Geophysical Year (IGY). As myths are prone to do, this one combines both an important truth and a good deal of misinformation. After fifty years in which it has shamelessly flattered the earth scientists, who are understandably rather fond of it, and undervalued the many non-scientists who advocated the internationalisation of Antarctica from 1910 onwards, it is time to lay it to rest. But before summarising the intermeshing contributions of private citizens, diplomats and other officials, and scientists, we should first take note of a different factor altogether, political geography.

Is it all going south? Four future scenarios for Antarctica

“…Associated with this growing membership is a subtle shift in the Antarctic Treaty Parties' motivations to participate in the ATS. The original 12 signatories and states acceding in the first two decades after the birth of the regime were largely driven by a perceived geopolitical need to prevent others from gaining strategic advantages from the Antarctic (Bulkeley, 2010) and managed the Antarctic through cooperation on scientific research, while states joining the ATS over the last three decades have been more focused on the resource potential the Antarctic holds (Dodds, 2006;Dodds & Collis, 2017). This can be seen in the significant growth, for example, in membership of the Antarctic Treaty during the 1970s and 1980s, when resource management discussions (fishing and minerals) were a priority issue (Fig.…”

Too Much Is Never Enough: The Cautionary Tale of Soviet Illegal Whaling

“…After the October Revolution of 1917, and to an even greater extent after WWII, the Soviet Union became a politically, socially, and economically isolated country (Bulkeley, 2010(Bulkeley, , 2011(Bulkeley, , 2012. The U.S.S.R. had a unique economic system that was based upon production, but not profi t per se, and presided over by an extensive bureaucracy under the control and leadership of the Communist Party (Gregory, 2006).…”

“…All foreign countries/ companies were characterized as "our enemies"-and from outside it was clear that the feeling was mutual, and that the Soviet Union was often perceived the same way (Bulkeley, 2010(Bulkeley, , 2011. The offi cial Soviet literature clearly stated that all that was done was just and for the noble cause of socialism, which was not the case with the capitalist countries and companies.…”

Moratoria for Global Governance and Contested Technology: The Case of Climate Engineering

“…When only two nations supported this proposal, Chile instead proposed a modus vivendi arrangement, which would freeze claims and objections for five to ten years. 140 By separating Antarctic activities from claims, the modus vivendi would let states freely conduct research on the continent, and would remove incentives to mount new bases or expeditions merely to strengthen or contest claims. 141 The United States found the pro-posal attractive, as it offered advantages similar to its prior stance of neither making nor recognizing claims, 142 and began working with Chile on a modified proposal.…”