Melting ice has caused icebergs to break off and pose a risk to navigation, but in Antarctica, geopolitics is partially frozen.

Rising temperatures are opening up the Arctic to trade routes and the dispute between various countries for the future control of the riches of its subsoil. In Antarctica, with lower temperatures and slower melting, what lies beneath the white mantle is not an ocean, but a continent far from shipping lanes and the direct interests of the great powers. There are reasons why the main international players prefer to keep all claims about the South Pole in the fridge.

January 16, 2018

ARTICLE / Alona Sainetska [English version].

Antarctica is a continent with mountain ranges and lakes, surrounded by an ocean and with a total surface area of 14 million square kilometers. Because of its location at opposite poles, Antarctica is often compared to the ice mass of the Arctic Ocean, which is instead a frozen sea surrounded by land. In those northern parts of Eurasia and America, north of the Arctic Circle parallel, about 4 million people live. In contrast, Antarctica, with its average temperature of -49°C, is absolutely uninhabitable and is today considered a natural sanctuary that attracts the attention of many countries in the international community.

Despite not presenting, at first glance, significant elements of conflict in the global system as a whole, the sovereignty of its territory has never been free of disputes and territorial claims by countries such as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, France, Argentina and Chile. Although later left at Fail, the claims of these countries did not interfere with each other, except in the case of Argentina and Chile, whose claims were on land with higher concentrations of Antarctic shrimp or krill and which had already been claimed in whole or in part by England.

In this issue there was a transcendental coincidence of interests of the countries mentioned above and also of the non-claimant superpowers, as was the case of the United States and the USSR, which showed little desire to turn both the continent and the maritime space into the object of political-military confrontations. This fact greatly facilitated the negotiations on the future legal status of "the frozen continent".

The first attempt to establish a special legal regime for Antarctica was made by the United States in 1948. However, this idea failed when confronted with the civil service examination of countries wishing to extend their sovereignty to Antarctic territories. It was only two years later that the continent again aroused the interest of the great powers when the USSR announced that it would not accept any agreement on Antarctica in which it was not represented.

Faced with the need to reach a consensus, and as a result of the enormous efforts of the world's academic community , a climate of cooperation and international dialogue on Antarctica was born, which allowed free access to the continent for scientists of any nationality, as well as the exchange of the results of their research. signature This new context led to the adoption of the Antarctic Treaty (AT) on December 1, 1959, which came into force on June 23, 1961. Any possible modification, by majority vote, was postponed until a lecture planned for 30 years after its entry into force; when 1991 arrived, not only were no changes implemented, but safeguards were added.

In the AT, the countries involved undertook to recognize a special legal regime for Antarctica, giving it the status of "terra nullius". In addition, it established the demilitarization of the Antarctic continent, which reserved the frozen space exclusively for peaceful purposes and prohibited the establishment of instructions military.

On the other hand, it proclaimed the freezing of all territorial sovereignty claims over Antarctica, and during the period of validity of the treaty no new claims could be made or those previously made extended.

It also established the right to appoint observers to ensure compliance with the objectives of the treaty and provided for the holding of periodic meetings of the original signatory states of the AT, plus other states that have been granted consultative status for carrying out important scientific missions in Antarctica.

Scientific and economic potential

In 1991, a further step was taken in the conservation of the frozen giant. goal With the aim of responding to issues such as climate change and the need to protect the special ecosystem that the continent represented, the so-called protocol "complementary" to the AT on environmental protection was signed in Madrid. The condition for its entry into force entrance was that it be ratified by all the consultative members of the Antarctic Treaty. It prohibited any exploitation subject of mineral resources other than for scientific purposes. This prohibition could only be lifted by unanimous agreement and kept the continent away from possible plundering of its great natural resources. Antarctica thus became a unique place in the world for the coexistence of man and nature.

However, recent decades have introduced many strategic changes that have given rise to serious doubts and concerns about the effectiveness of the AT. Its scientific and economic potential, together with its enormous biodiversity and wealth of natural resources, have greatly increased the importance of Antarctica. The increased interaction and interdependence of the different national, international and transnational actors that make up the world community has also multiplied the desire to influence and participate, by different means, in the pursuit of particular interests in this area of the world.

Thus, along with projects to guarantee environmental conditions, such as the discussion on the creation of a large natural preservation area in the Ross Sea, sometimes controversial initiatives are launched to exploit Antarctic resources, such as the one suggested by the United Arab Emirates to tow icebergs that break off from the Antarctic ice mass to the Middle East, in order to combat drought and meet the needs of its population (Antarctica contains 80% of the planet's freshwater reserves).

These icebergs, on the other hand, can pose a threat to navigation and commerce, especially if they are large, as may be the case with the Larsen C ice shelf, which is increasingly close to collapse, leaving a huge iceberg of 5,800 square kilometers adrift.

Countries with different weights

Although a possible exploitation of Antarctica is not contemplated in the short or medium term and remains hypothetical for the time being, thanks to the disadvantages resulting from the remoteness of the continent and its harsh and unfavorable conditions, there is a risk of a future deployment of economic activity in the Antarctic region at the global level. The latter will depend on international alignments that may arise.

The alignments in relation to Antarctica take their cue from the management structure imposed by the Treaty, which includes three categories of membership:

• The original signatories (Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, the Soviet Union, Great Britain and the United States) that participate in the consultative meetings of the TA where decisions are adopted ( plenary session of the Executive Council ).

• Those States that wish to join and that, having developed important scientific activities, obtain consent to participate in the Consultative Meetings (e.g. Poland, Germany, India, Brazil, China and Uruguay).

• States that adhere, but which, because they do not carry out significant scientific activity, cannot participate in decision-making (Czechoslovakia, Cuba, Hungary, Bulgaria, Peru, Italy, New Guinea, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, Romania and Finland).  

A similar status of collision of interests on the part of international actors occurs at the opposite pole of the Earth, the Arctic. Its climatic conditions present much warmer temperatures that allow the thawing of its sensitive ice cap. Thus, the thaw caused by global warming makes the Arctic's energy wealth increasingly accessible (it is estimated to hold 13% of the oil and 30% of the natural gas remaining on the planet) and thus intensifies the battle for the rights to exploit it by countries such as Denmark, Canada, the United States, Norway and Russia. On the other hand, there is China, for whom the thaw has many positive consequences, such as the opening of a new, much shorter inter-oceanic shipping route between northern Europe and Shanghai, or easy access to mining in areas such as Greenland.  

The abundance of essential minerals in technology, the opening of new shipping routes, and the fact that the lands around the Arctic Circle are habitable, with benevolent conditions and increasingly easy access, make it very likely that the Arctic will be integrated into the global economic structure sooner than Antarctica.