[HOME]  [NEXT]

THE POLITICS OF ANTARCTICA

*Q: Why is Antarctica important?  Weather, fish, marine mammals; Only
    "non-sovereignized" continent in the world Perspective from
    "down under"

I.  Antarctica Treaty (1959)
    A. Nuclear-free, military-free
       1. Cold War politics
    B. Scientific preserve
       1. Intl. Geophysical Year (1957)
		States had to conduct substantial scientific research to
		qualify as a Consultative Party
    C. Realist explanations
       1. US/Soviet interests:  limited spread of nw's; 
		enabled them both to focus their mil. resources elsewhere
       2. U.S. was a hegemonic leader:  wanted to minimize conflict 
		among its allies (e.g., Argentina, Chile, & Britain)
       3. Territorial states retain veto power
    D. Post-internationalist explanation
       1. Scientists set agenda (sov-free actors)
		Science requires open communication & intellectual freedom 
		  >> pushed states beyond narrow ntl. security concerns
		Domestic science agencies, like NSF, took the lead 
		  (not DOD)
       2. World park proposal, 1972
    Q:  How wd. Grotians interpret Ant. Treaty System?  Marxists?

II. Living Resources (CCAMLR, 1980)
	Not really covered in R&D
    A. Goal: prevent Soviet & Japanese distant water fishing fleets from
       overfishing, esp. krill, which is base of ecosystem
       1.  Allows only "rational use"
    B. Ecosystem management
       1. But voluntary compliance & no enforcement mechanism
    C. Realist explanation
       1. U.S. had no economic interest, so cd. afford to push an
	  ecosystem approach (no fishing fleets in area)
       2. No real infringement on state sovereignty 
    D. Post-internationalist explanation
       1. Scientists, environmentalists set the agenda
    E. Grotian explanation?
    F. Ecological paradigm?
  Q:  Why has ecological approach been rel'ly successful in Ant.,
	 but not elsewhere?

III. Minerals (CRAMRA, 1988)
     Never entered into force
     Required consensus to mine
     Australia & France vetoed; the U.S. gave into domestic pressure 
       >> compromise:  50-year ban
     A. Realist explanation
        1. Saves security regime:  minerals exploration wd. have destroyed
 	   ATS security regime
	2. Did not go into effect bec. there was too much conflict among
 	   major parties
     B. P-I explanation
        1. Scientists, environmentalists
		 Jacques Cousteau >> France; Greenpeace wintered over
		  
		  --like NRDC setting up seismic monitoring stations in 
			USSR to show that a nuclear test ban could be verified
		     NGO takes on role of state
        2. Authority crises in states
     C. Grotian explanation
        1. Norms, regimes, and IOs make a difference
		 UN General Assembly charged ATCPs of elitism, allied w/ NGOs
		   >> more DCs became observing members of ATCP
     D. Marxist? -- hard to think of one
     E. Ecological?