Antarctica, Viña del Mar and the 1990 UN debate

Polar Record ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 27 (162) ◽  
pp. 211-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
International Research ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Research Station ◽  
30Th Anniversary ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Antarctic

AbstractThe Xlth Antarctic Treaty Special Consultative Meeting in Viña del Mar, Chile (19 November to 6 December 1990) aired the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties' views on conservation, following the collapse of support for the minerals convention. Almost simultaneously at the United Nations Assembly in New York, the eighth successive annual discussion on Antarctica included the usual critique of the Treaty System's political and legal framework. The conservationist emphasis apparent in 1989 continued in 1990, accompanied by an attack on Antarctic science. Particular emphasis was placed on adverse environmental impacts from the crowding together of scientific stations. Treaty parties countered with their long-standing opposition to UN interference in Treaty matters. Resolutions on Antarctica sought to exclude South Africa from ATS activities and to consider the establishment of a UN international research station. The 1990 discussions showed that the Treaty System at its 30th anniversary fails to enjoy universal support, and contributed to an emerging debate on the merits of Antarctic science.

The 1991 UN session: the environmental protocol fails to satisfy the Antarctic Treaty System's critics

Polar Record ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 28 (167) ◽  
pp. 307-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
South African ◽  
The State ◽  
Research Station ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
Apartheid Regime ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Environment

ABSTRACT1991 saw the ninth successive United Nations (UN) discussion on the ‘Question of Antarctica.’ The adoption of two more resolutions critical of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), including South African participation therein, reaffirmed the unchanging nature of the UN episode and the lack of consensus on the management of Antarctica. Key developments affecting Antarctica continue to occur away from New York: during 1990—91 the negotiations conducted at Vifia del Mar and Madrid for the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (PREP) and the measures agreed at the Bonn Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting proved the point. The critics of the ATS were appeased by neither PREP and its mining prohibition nor the recent dismantling of the apartheid regime in South Africa.Two UN reports were published on the state of the Antarctic environment as well as the proposed establishment of a UNsponsored research station in Antarctica. One resolution adopted in December 1991 called for annual UN reports on the Antarctic environment, although fiscal and other considerations meant that the research station proposal was effectively shelved. Another resolution urged South African exclusion from ATS meetings. The tenth annual UN discussion on Antarctica is scheduled for the close of 1992. There exists growing evidence that the critical campaign is losing momentum, although it seems premature to anticipate Antarctica's imminent demise as an UN agenda topic.

Another sterile annual ritual? The United Nations and Antarctica 1987

Polar Record ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 24 (150) ◽  
pp. 207-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
United Nations ◽  
South African ◽  
The South ◽  
Points Of Interest ◽  
The Future ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Future Management ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

AbstractThe UN Secretary-General's third Report of September 1987 provided the background for the fifth annual round of the UN's consideration of the ‘Question of Antarctica’. The First Committee's discussions in November 1987 resulted in the adoption by large majorities of two further UN resolutions in favour of a moratorium on the Antarctic minerals regime negotiations, an enhanced UN role in the operations of the Antarctic Treaty System, and the exclusion of South Africa from Consultative Meetings. On the surface, the session might be dismissed as yet another ‘sterile annual UN ritual’, serving to confirm the international community's lack of consensus about the future management of Antarctica. In reality, the episode, suggesting that the UN/Antarctic relationship may be at the crossroads, offered several points of interest, including increased signs of strain within the Antarctic Treaty System consequent upon the South African issue, and a greater appreciation by the critics of the need to work for change within the framework of the existing Antarctic Treaty regime.

The United Nations and Antarctica 1986

Polar Record ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 23 (147) ◽  
pp. 683-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
United Nations ◽  
South African ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

AbstractIn November 1986 the United Nations considered again the ‘Question of Antarctica’ and published a further study, up-dating and developing that produced in 1984 and guiding UN First Committee discussions of 18–19 November 1986. Three resolutions were adopted concerning availability of information to the UN on Antarctica, a moratorium on the Antarctic minerals regime negotiations, and the exclusion of South Africa as a Consulative Party. Most Antarctic Treaty parties did not vote; the consensus that characterized UN debates on Antarctica in 1983 and 1984 has yet to be restored. The 1986 session suggested more questions rather than providing answers; a key question is whether the Antarctic Treaty System will preserve its unity in view of the problem of continuing South African membership.

The United Nations and Antarctica, 1994: the restoration of consensus?

Polar Record ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 31 (179) ◽  
pp. 419-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Major Change ◽  
International Community ◽  
Consensus Approach ◽  
Future Role ◽  
Change Of Direction ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
Environment And Development ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
First Time

ABSTRACTThe twelfth successive UN session on the ‘Question of Antarctica,’ held at the close of 1994, saw a major change of direction. One brief session of the First Committee, followed by the General Assembly's adoption of resolution A49/80 without a vote, signified the restoration of a consensus approach towards the ‘Question of Antarctica’ for the first time since 1985. Resolution A49/80 stressed the need for Antarctic Treaty Parties (ATPs) to meet commitments undertaken at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, and particularly to continue providing the wider international community with information about Antarctic developments. The ‘Question of Antarctica’ will not be placed on the UN agenda again until 1996, thereby breaking the sequence of annual UN discussions started in 1983. On the surface, consensus was restored, but it is debatable how far the outcome represented merely a papering over of the cracks rather than the basis for an enduring solution to the problems dividing ATPs and their critics. The key point at issue remains the nature and extent of the UN's future role in Antarctic affairs, particularly as ATPs will only accept a limited UN role performed within the context of the Antarctic Treaty System.

Twenty years on: the UN and the ‘Question of Antarctica,’ 1983–2003

Polar Record ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 205-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Community ◽  
Consensus Approach ◽  
Annual Basis ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Malaysian Government ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

The United Nations (UN) has now been involved with the ‘Question of Antarctica’ for 20 years. Divisions within the international community about the most appropriate form of management for Antarctica, which was presented to the UN as a region of global importance, have never completely disappeared, even if the restoration of a consensus approach during the mid-1990s was based upon a broader appreciation of the merits of the Antarctic Treaty System. Both Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties and non-Consultative Parties, pointing to the regime's enduring intrinsic qualities, have adopted an unyielding attitude towards Treaty outsiders advocating a more democratic, accountable, and transparent regime. Even so, the critical lobby, led by Dr Mahathir's Malaysian government, has never gone away. Initially, the ‘Question of Antarctica’ was discussed at the UN on an annual basis, but since 1996 it has been placed on a triennial reference. Following the most recent session in late 2002, the topic is scheduled to be placed on the UN's agenda again in 2005. This article reviews critically the key themes characterising the UN's involvement in the ‘Question of Antarctica’ since 1983, while using successive Polar Record articles on individual UN sessions to provide a framework of reference and an informed basis for further research on the topic.

scholarly journals Antarctic politics and Antarctic science — are they at loggerheads?

1991 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-123
Author(s):  
John A Heap
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Scientific Investigation ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Environment

“Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only …… Freedom of scientific investigation and co-operation toward that end …… shall continue, subject to the provisions of the present Treaty.”These are the fundamental objectives of the Antarctic Treaty as expressed in Articles I and II. What follows in the Treaty, and in most of the many “Recommendations” to the Governments of Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties (ATCPs), is aimed at securing these objectives by the creation of a framework of law. Unusually for a system of laws, most of this legal framework is hortatory rather than mandatory in character - it cajoles rather than orders. Perhaps not surprisingly this has given rise to damaging suggestions about its ability to provide adequate protection for the Antarctic environment. The response of the ATCPs to this criticism has been to embark on a review of existing Antarctic law, to make it more consistent, reduce overlaps and more especially, make much of it mandatory. This process began at the XIth Special Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting in Chile last November. Since it aims to provide greater clarity, accessibility and certainty in the law, it must be welcomed. But within these admirable objectives a prospect of loggerheads begins to loom.

The Déjà vu System of International Trusteeship in Continental Antarctica: A Textual Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-131
Author(s):  
Xueping Li
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Textual Analysis ◽  
Intrinsic Values ◽  
Continental Antarctica ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
Deja Vu ◽  
Déjà Vu ◽  
The Antarctic

In the name of environmental protection, the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting seems to have borrowed the paradigm of international trusteeship of the United Nations for managing the Antarctic land-based protected areas. By comparing and analysing the critical questions highly concerned, this paper offers preliminary thoughts on the development and refinement of the conception of land-based protected areas as a déjà vu system of international trusteeship and its surrounding legal applications and implications in continental Antarctica, and challenges the direction followed by this system in protecting Antarctic intrinsic values in legal discourse.

General Assembly

1952 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 559-575
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
New York ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
United Nations ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
New Members ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Regular Session

The seventh regular session of the United Nations General Assembly convened at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on Tuesday, October 14, 1952, to consider an agenda which included, in addition to administrative, legal and financial items, the reports of various organs and agencies of the United Nations, and the continuing problems of Korea, the limitation and reduction of armaments, economic development and the admission of new Members, certain new problems such as the questions of Morocco and Tunisia, minorities in the Union of South Africa and the complaint of violation by Arab states of their obligations under the Charter.

The United Nations and Antarctica 1993: continuing controversy about the UN's role in Antarctica

Polar Record ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 30 (175) ◽  
pp. 257-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Significant Advance ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Recognition ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Apartheid Regime ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

ABSTRACTThe eleventh successive annual United Nations discussion on the ‘Question of Antarctica’ took place at the close of 1993. In November the UN First Committee, guided by two reports from the UN Secretary-General, adopted a further resolution, which was adopted in December by the General Assembly as resolution A48/80. As usual, UN members, although displaying evidence of a wider international recognition of the regime's merits, proved critical of the Antarctic Treaty System. By contrast, Antarctic Treaty Parties (ATPs) remained reluctant to allow the UN the type of role in Antarctica advocated by their critics. ATPs, following the course adopted in 1985, still refused either to participate in the UN discussions or to vote. As a result, it proved impossible yet again to secure a consensus about either the ‘Question of Antarctica’ in general or the UN's role in Antarctica in particular. One significant advance in 1993 concerned the end of demands advanced since 1985 for South Africa's exclusion from Antarctic meetings, a change prompted by the dismantlement of the apartheid regime. The ‘Question of Antarctica’ is scheduled to be placed on the UN agenda in 1994.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document