Antarctica: After Sixty Years of Peace and Silence, the Return of International Geopolitical Noise

The writing of this article coincides with the sixtieth anniversary of the Antarctic Treaty and the Thirtieth anniversary of the 1991 Madrid Protocol on Environmental Protection in the Antarctic. To celebrate this anniversary, the yearly Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting took place in Paris in June 2021. Antarctica is known as a frozen, silent, and uncolored continent located in the southern pole of the Globe and surrounded by the Southern, Pacific, Atlantic, and Indian Oceans (Pervaze & Sheikh 2021). In the past, several States claimed sovereignty in certain areas. While few of these Countries have acknowledged each other’s claims, the validity of these steps has not been universally recognized and has non-legitimacy in international law.

The Washington Treaty, Madrid Protocols, and other related agreements, collectively called the Antarctic Treaty System, regulate the legal framework of Antarctica (Haward 2012). The elaboration of this treaty came just after the international geophysical year of 1957-1958, which impacted the legal status of Antarctica. This legal instrument was signed by twelve countries at that time, including Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States and Soviet Union (then Russia) (Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, 2019). Antarctica was described as a natural reserve devoted to peace and science and prohibiting military and para-military activities. This treaty was the first arms control agreement concluded during the Cold War.

Countries do not hide their geopolitical interests in Antarctica. Two Great States, Russia and China, are emerging as active powers in Antarctica to counter Western presence in this region. Indeed, what worries Westerners is the pursuit of expansionist ambitions of Russia and China in the world. Certainly, the United States and its allies will never repeat what happened in Crimea and the South China Sea in Antarctica. In this context, the decades to come will shed more light in this regard, making Antarctica a global issue, considering the interests of the medium and large powers.

The Geostrategic Intrusion Attempts by China and Russia in Antarctica 

Two international powers openly show a challenge to the West in Antarctica: Russia and China. First, China’s ambitions in Antarctica had experienced remarkable growth since 2018. It is becoming recognized as a new influential player in Antarctica after implementing its new foreign policy in the region, dubbed the Polar Silk Road (Brady 2017). The new Chinese polar policy is established by an increased presence in the world polar forums and through colossal investments in Nordic polar Countries, such as Iceland, during the global economic crisis of 2008. Thus, China continues to develop shipyards for the construction of icebreaker fleets intended for polar geostrategic expeditions.

China’s plans have been influenced by the fact that the United States and its closest allies near Antarctica, Australia and New Zealand still have little idea of what China is pursuing there. In this context, China’s policy towards Antarctica is still relatively unknown, although it can be broadly compared to its policy in the Arctic. China’s ambitions in Antarctica pose as significant a threat to Western interests as its claims to target it in the Arctic region. China benefits currently from the international legal status of Antarctica. At the same time, this is not the case in the Arctic, where the five States bordering this Ocean do not allow suspicious activity to go unnoticed.

Worryingly, China has also extended its grand economic and industrial ambitions in Antarctica, as the Madrid Protocol, which will expire in 2048, prohibits this kind of activity. China publicly relies on the two Poles as a potential source of rare earth elements, hydrocarbons, and fishery resources to meet its significant industrial needs and ensure its economic prosperity and competitiveness globally. Despite operating activities being strictly controlled in the Southern Ocean under the Madrid Protocol, China has a global reputation for underestimating the Sea Law in the South China Sea. This behavior of maritime domination was the subject of a judgment rendered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration who condemned China for forcibly seizing islets in the Spratley Archipelago, and the Scarborough Shoals for their artificialization and the resulting environmental damage (Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Case No 2013-19. 12 July 2016)

World economic domination does not pass without the possession of naval and military power. In this context, China’s military objectives in Antarctica are real and growing. This is reflected in the construction of a permanent airport in Antarctica in 2018 (Feng 2018), the deployment of a growing fleet of icebreakers and the posting of People’s Liberation Army personnel to research stations and radar interception sites in Antarctica. China has not reported any of these military or para-military activities in Antarctica to the signatories of the Washington Treaty, which constitutes a violation of the provisions of international law. Since the end of the Cold War, soldiers have rarely been deployed by the signatory States of the Treaty. In the years to come, no one can deny China’s race in Antarctica towards goals other than scientific ones.

Russia’s current Antarctic policy conforms to the Soviet era, which implies maintaining its status as a world power. In this framework, it should be noted that the first Russian expedition to Antarctica dates back to 1819-1821, and which is commanded by Captain Bellingshause (Lukin 2014). Although Russia’s activities in Antarctica have lagged in science, infrastructure and personnel training in the past, this country has recently regained its prestige as a polar actor of great weight by carrying out large-scale science projects in Antarctica. Moreover, behind this policy hide other geostrategic interests. Thus, one cannot deny the geopolitical claims of Russia in Antarctica even if in the short term it is not possible to resort to the exploitation of the natural resources, the emphasis in the long term will be on the economic and geostrategic potential of this region. Russia is currently establishing a strong foothold in the polar regions to protect its vital interests. For these reasons, this military power has a competitive presence program in the polar regions (Lukin 2014). At the same time, Russia is demonstrating its willingness to engage within the Antarctic Treaty system framework and strengthen its global position to maintain Antarctica as an area of peace, stability, and international cooperation (Gan 2012).

2- The Diversity of Contemporary Western Interests in Antarctica

Since the early 20th century, Western interests in Antarctica have focused on scientific research. The western resident population in Antarctica is made up of scientists and support staff. This is a profitable activity for the economies of the States whose nationals are involved in Antarctica as these require the provision of goods and services. Although scientific research and environmental protection are the main concentrations of Western states in Antarctica, distance, and the need for special infrastructure to adapt to extreme weather conditions pose real challenges. They are limited to supporting environmental management projects as part of the global commitment to tackle climate change and its consequences for Antarctica (Elzinga 2017). Western governments are likely to revise their Antarctic policy, which is mostly based on scientific research because deploying colossal sums for scientific research is a matter of public concern. Indeed, governments encourage scientists to turn to the private sector to finance their research projects.

For their part, Australia and New Zealand have been carrying out scientific research missions for decades in Antarctica due to their geographic proximity. For example, Australia’s interests include investments in scientific research infrastructure and an ongoing program to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in the Southern Ocean through Marine Protected Areas. Compared to Russia, the United States has been deprived of functioning polar icebreakers to advance in research and scientific expeditions in Antarctica. The possession of icebreakers guarantees easy access to the polar regions.

The Western States will promote the protection of the polar environment a Trojan horse to limit the geostrategic presence of China and Russia in Antarctica, pointed out for neglecting environmental issues and running towards military expansion. Indeed, the new US administration and its Western allies can send a strong signal about the international community’s commitment to preserve the Antarctic environment by making clear its intent to preserve the key provisions of the Madrid Protocol in effect beyond 2048 like they did before. China and Russia cannot continue what they are planning in Antarctica by neglecting the spirit of international law.

In addition to scientific research and economic development, western countries have shown increased interest in Antarctic tourism in recent years. This activity has grown and diversified to include expedition and cruise explorations (Liggett & Stewart 2017). Antarctica attracts about 30,000 tourists annually; visitors use ships or aircraft to get to this remote region (Ross & Weeden 2017). According to guidelines set by the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO), only one ship can visit the continent at a time, so wherever you land, you won’t find large crowds (Splettstoesser 2000). The IAATO is responsible for organizing trips to Antarctica and requires that tourist expeditions issue reports relating to their visits and maintains that these trips have no negative impact on the environment. For example, Antarctic tourism guidelines are referred to in the Environmental Protocol and the 2004 guidelines on emergency planning, insurance and other matters (Liggett & Stewart 2017).

In addition, during the third Antarctic Consultative Meeting held in Paris in June 2021, the Committee for Environment Protection (CEP) addressed the questions of the implications of climate change on; the environment, non-native species, plans for the protection and management of marine protected areas, conservation of Antarctic flora and fauna. However, what characterized the work of this meeting was the revision of the general guidelines on visits to Antarctica, as well as the safety of tourist expeditions, scientific research and non-governmental activities (Liggett, McIntosh, Thompson, Gilbert and Storey 2011).

3-International Antarctica Law Now, and Beyond

Six decades ago, Antarctica experienced territorial disputes between several States similar to those in the Arctic today. Seven Nations have claimed territories in Antarctica, and the situation has been the subject of two litigation proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ 1956). Finally, the conflicts were resolved by an International Treaty in 1959, which entered into force in 1961. This Treaty froze the territorial claims on this continent reserved for scientific and peaceful purposes. Thus, any military or para-military maneuver or activity is prohibited by international law, and any territorial claim in this region of the world will be declared invalid.

For this reason, Antarctica was distinguished from other parts of the planet with quite an international status. However, the Treaty did not settle the territorial disputes definitively; they are frozen for the period of the validity of the Treaty. Furthermore, the Antarctic Treaty has demonstrated its effectiveness in the good governance of this region, particularly in the environmental and science fields.

Note that Russia and China have signed the Treaty and its 1991 Madrid Protocol which definitively prohibits mining, protects the continent’s unique flora and fauna and seeks to preserve Antarctica for scientific and academic research open to all Nations. However, China has used some of its Antarctic bases for high-powered satellite receiving stations and telescopes, both military and para-military activities prohibited by the agreement. Since 2015, none of the Chinese bases has been inspected, except Chile and Argentina, which visited the Great Wall station near South America. According to the Washington Treaty and the Madrid Protocols on Antarctica, an inspection regime has been concluded. Indeed, the signatory States of the agreement must carry out periodic visits to the stations operated by dozens of Countries. In this context, the States concerned have not inspected or visited some of the five Chinese and Russian research stations in Antarctica so far, such as the Kunlun station, which is the second southernmost and highest installation in Antarctica, and to confirm the fundamental objectives of these facilities (Sakiko 2020). So far, no western country has dared to carry out such military activities in recent years in Antarctica.

In addition, concerning the legal framework for the organization of tourist activities in Antarctica, the signatory States of the Treaty and the Protocol on the environment must introduce into their national law rules governing the holding of private actions in Antarctica. Indeed, visitors are obliged to obtain permission to visit Antarctica from their competent authorities (Manual of Regulations and Guidelines Relevant to Tourism and Non-Governmental Activities in Antarctica 2019). Furthermore, to fight against maritime pollution in polar waters, the International Maritime Organization has drawn up regulations prohibiting the use of fuel oil in Antarctica and the implementation of the Polar Code to regulate maritime navigation in polar waters.

Conclusion

From all of the above, it can be said that despite an international agreement relating to the protection of Antarctica, the race for economic domination and military hegemony seems to be gaining ground under the pretext of scientific exploration. The scientific and military aspects are both linked as science is used in sophisticated military technology. Note that this frozen continent has already been the subject of a theoretical geographical division between certain Countries.

As seen in the article, Antarctica concerns all States because of its contribution to climate adaptation and the balance of global warming. For this reason, scientific research and environmental protection should be given priority over economic and military interests in the decades to come. However, in reality, the whole of Antarctica constitutes an insufficiently studied land, which still needs to discover its secrets in depth.

Faced with this situation, the international community must refer to any compromise to international law as a valid basis. In this background, instead of politicizing this region and running towards its militarization, it is time to strengthen the legal system surrounding Antarctica to guarantee all nations’ peaceful rights and interests. Antarctica is, first and foremost, a common heritage of humanity.

BIBLIOGRAPHIES

LEGISLATION

Amendments to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), entered into force on 1August 2011.

COMPILATION of key documents of the Antarctic Treaty system. Fourth edition, Buenos Aires: Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, 2019. 196 p.

International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code), entered into force on 1 January 2017.

Manual of Regulations and Guidelines Relevant to Tourism and Non-Governmental Activities in Antarctica, adopted on 11 July 2019.

JURISPRUDENCE

Antarctica Cases (United Kingdom v. Argentina; United Kingdom v. Chile), Orders of 16 March, 1956, ICJ Removal from the list.

The South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China), Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Case No 2013-19. 12 July 2016. 

SECONDARY MATERIAL: MONOGRAPHS

Aant Elzinga. The Continent for Science. Handbook on the Politics of Antarctica, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.

Brady, Anne-Marie. China as a Polar Great Power. Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Gan, I. “Russia, the Post-Soviet World, and Antarctica.” In The Emerging Politics of Antarctica, ed. A. Brady, 130-46. New York: Routledge, 2012.

Haward, M. “The Antarctic Treaty System: Challenges, Coordination, and Congruity.” In The Emerging Politics of Antarctica, ed. A. Brady, 13-28. New York: Routledge, 2012. 

Liggett, D., & Stewart, E. J. “Sailing in icy waters: Antarctic cruise tourism development, regulation and management”. In: Weeden, C., & Dowling, R. (Eds.). Cruise ship tourism (2nd ed.). (Wallingford: CABI, 2017a).

Dowling, Ross K., and Clare Weeden. Cruise Ship Tourism. 2nd edition., CABI, 2017.

Daniela Liggett, and Emma Stewart. “The Changing Face of Political Engagement in Antarctic Tourism.” Handbook on the Politics of Antarctica, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.

Stephanie Lawson, Global Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2021.

SECONDARY MATERIAL: ARTICLES

Bulkeley, Rip. “Bellingshausen in Britain: Supplying the Russian Antarctic Expedition, 1819” (2021) 107 Mariner’s Mirror.

Bob Frame, “Towards an Antarctic scenarios dashboard” (2020) 10 The Polar Journal.

Hataya, Sakiko. “Legal Implications of China’s Proposal for an Antarctic Specially Managed Area (ASMA) at Kunlun Station at Dome A” (2020) 12 The Yearbook of Polar Law.

Liggett, Daniela, et al. “Is It All Going South? Four Future Scenarios for Antarctica.” Polar Record, vol. 53, no. 5, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017).

Lukin, V.V. “Russia’s Current Antarctic Policy” (2014) 4 The Polar Journal.

Liggett, D., A. McIntosh, A. Thompson, N. Gilbert, and B. Storey. “From Frozen Continent to Tourism Hotspot? Five Decades of Antarctic Tourism Development and Management, and a Glimpse into the Future” (2011) 32 Tourism Management.

Ottavio Quirico, “Climate Change, Regionalism, and Universalism: Elegy for the Arctic and the Antarctic?” (2020) 35:3 Am U Int’l L Rev

Pervaze A.; et al. Sheikh, Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical & Environmental Issues, 10 March, 2021.

Splettstoesser, J. F. (2000). “IAATO’s stewardship of Antarctic environment: a history of tour operators’ concern for a vulnerable part of the world” (2000) 2 International Journal of Tourism Research.

Newspapers

Alexander B. Gray “China’s Next Geopolitical Goal: Dominate Antarctica, The National Interest, (20 March, 2021).

Emily Feng, “China to build fist Antarctic airport”, Financial Times, (29 October 2018).