The UN and Antarctica, 1999: the continuation of consensus

Polar Record ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 36 (199) ◽  
pp. 291-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
First Century ◽  
Annual Basis ◽  
United Nations Environment Program ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Nations Environment ◽  
The Way

AbstractIn 1999 the United Nations, acting in accordance with the 1996 resolution A51/56, discussed the ‘Question of Antarctica’ again. The UN, having taken up the topic on an annual basis in 1983, is currently placing it upon the First Committee's agenda every three years. The next reference will be in 2002. In 1999 the UN First Committee discussions, guided by a report produced by the UN Secretary-General (UNSG) updating members on recent Antarctic developments, indicated that disagreements still remain about the management of Antarctica. Meanwhile, members adopted another consensus resolution, A54/45, which largely replicated the wording of its 1996 predecessor, most notably in requesting the UNSG to produce another report to guide the next UN discussion scheduled for 2002. Earlier in 1999, the Lima Declaration, adopted by the Antarctic Treaty Parties in May, highlighted the view that the ATS, although linking up increasingly with UN organisations like the United Nations Environment Program, continues to offer the way forward for Antarctica in the twenty-first century.

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.

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.

Progress on a Small Planet

Worldview ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 11-12
Author(s):  
Sudhir Sen
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
New York City ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Executive Director ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Human Environment ◽  
United Nations Environment Program ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Many ◽  
Nations Environment

“The environment today is threatened not primarily by lack of knowledge about our problems and what to do about them, but by a massive failure of will.” So said Maurice F. Strong, chairman of the International Convocation for World Environmental Regeneration held in New York City this past February. Mr. Strong, it may be recalled, had served as the secretary-general of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in 1972, and later as the first executive director of the United Nations Environment Program when this agency was established to give effect to the many-sided resolution adopted at Stockholm.

The United Nations and Antarctica, 2005: the end of the ‘Question of Antarctica’?

Polar Record ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 217-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Major Change ◽  
United Nations Environment Programme ◽  
Draft Resolution ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
First Time ◽  
Nations Environment

In November 2005 the ‘Question of Antarctica’ was taken up yet again by the UN First Committee. Following formal placement upon its agenda in 1983 by the Malaysian government, the UN has discussed the topic regularly, initially annually, then biennially, but more recently upon a triennial basis. As usual, in 2005 UN members were guided by a lengthy report produced for the United Nations Secretary General (UNSG) by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in order to outline recent developments affecting Antarctica and the Antarctic Treaty system (ATS). In November 2005 the UN First Committee, acting upon proposed amendments advanced by the Malaysian delegation, agreed to a major change of course. Thus, resolution L60, adopted by the committee without a vote, stipulated that the UN, though remaining ‘seized’ of the ‘Question of Antarctica’, would not place the topic upon the agenda of the 63rd. session in 2008. Nor would the UNSG be required, henceforth, to produce a report on Antarctica for members. In December 2005, the UN General Assembly adopted draft resolution L60 as resolution 60/47, once again without a vote. As a result, for the first time since 1983, the UN is no longer scheduled to return to the ‘Question of Antarctica’. Meanwhile, the episode has raised interesting questions about future developments: the UN's role, if any, in the ‘Question of Antarctica’, the direction of Malaysian policy towards the ATS, including membership thereof; the continued ability of the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties (ATCPs) to manage Antarctica in a democratic, transparent and accountable manner without attracting criticism from the broader international community; and the relevance of the common heritage principle to the Antarctic region.

The United Nations' Study on Antarctica, 1984

Polar Record ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 22 (140) ◽  
pp. 499-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Understanding ◽  
Amount Of Information ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

AbstractIn 1983 the UN Secretary-General was requested by the General Assembly to prepare a ‘Study on the question of Antarctica’ for the 1984 meeting of the Assembly. Published in November 1984, the Study provided a foundation for the UN First Committee's discussions of 28–30 November. These demonstrated, as had the discussions of the previous year, the polarization of views among UN member states for and against the Antarctic Treaty System. The UN resolution that followed the discussions similarly represented little advance on that of 1983, merely postponing any decision for a further year. Meanwhile the considerable amount of information marshalled for the Study may help to spread interest in Antarctic affairs and enhance international understanding.

The Plenitude of Nature and Sovereignty

2019 ◽  
pp. 139-168
Author(s):  
Alessandro Antonello
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Food And Agriculture Organization ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Antarctic

This chapter investigates how the foundational tension of Antarctic geopolitics over sovereignty and territory fared in the context of discussions on mineral and marine living resources in the 1970s. It investigates how the Antarctic Treaty parties fought off concerted interests from forums and states outside the treaty, including the Non-Aligned Movement within the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and the Food and Agriculture Organization, and growing international environmentalist organizations. It also investigates how the Antarctic Treaty parties tried to shift the balance of power among themselves, especially between the claimant and nonclaimant states. In the end, the Antarctic Treaty parties as a whole secured the treaty from outside forces, and the claimant states successfully perpetuated their ideas about sovereignty and territory in the changing context of the UN Law of the Sea against the acquiescent nonclaimants.

scholarly journals The Continental Shelf of Antarctica: Implications of the Requirement to Make a Submission to the CLCS under Article 76 of the LOS Convention

2002 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 485-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex G. Oude Elferink
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Outer Limit ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Antarctic

AbstractThis article looks at the question of how the obligation of states parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to submit information on the outer limit of their continental shelf to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and the regime established by the Antarctic Treaty can be reconciled. Under the latter Treaty states have 'agreed to disagree' about the legal status of Antarctica. The establishment of an outer limit of the continental shelf on the basis of the recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf would pose a threat to this agreement to disagree as it would recognise the existence of coastal states and maritime zones. The article sets out the options of the states involved to deal with this issue. It is concluded that there are a number of approaches which safeguard the rights of coastal states under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the agreement to disagree of the Antarctic Treaty.

A continent surrounded by advice: recent reports on Antarctica

Polar Record ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 24 (151) ◽  
pp. 285-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Future ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

AbstractThe enhanced international significance of Antarctica during the 1980s is shown by a proliferation of studies analysing current and future possibilities. The year 1987 proved no exception to this trend; reports issued under the auspices of the European Parliament, the United Nations and the David Davies Memorial Institute of International Affairs reinforced the impression that Antarctica has become a continent surrounded by advice, even if it proves difficult to evaluate how far such reports will influence the policy-makers. Conservation proved a common feature, while the reports, discussed in this article, raise interesting questions about the future of the Antarctic Treaty system.

Defending polar empire: opposition to India's proposal to raise the ‘Antarctic Question’ at the United Nations in 1956

Polar Record ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Howkins
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Colonial Studies ◽  
International Response ◽  
Common Goals ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
British Commonwealth ◽  
The Antarctic

ABSTRACTThis paper examines the international response to India's 1956 proposal to raise the ‘Antarctic Question’ at the United Nations. It focuses in particular on the uneasy alliance that developed between the British Commonwealth and Latin America in opposition to the Indian proposal. Although Great Britain, Argentina, and Chile were bitterly disputing the sovereignty of the Antarctic Peninsula region, they shared a common desire to keep the southern continent off the agenda of the United Nations. This ability to work together for common goals, despite their differences, set an important precedent for the Antarctic Treaty that would be signed in 1959. In this way, opposition to the Indian proposal, more than the proposal itself, played an important role in the history of Antarctica in the 1950s. Latin American opposition to the proposal helped to fragment any ‘anti-imperial’ coalition that might have developed in Antarctica. This fragmentation helps us to place the Antarctic Treaty System into the framework of post-colonial studies.

Antarctica at the UN 1988: seeking a bridge of understanding

Polar Record ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 25 (155) ◽  
pp. 329-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

ABSTRACTThe struggle between Antarctic Treaty Parties and their UN critics regarding the management of Antarctica was resumed in November 1988 when, for the sixth successive year, the United Nations discussed the 'Question of Antarctica'. This year the UN adopted two further resolutions reaffirming demands of 1987 for wider participation in the minerals negotiations, the involvement of the UN Secretary-General in Antarctic Treaty System operations, and the exclusion of South Africa from treaty meetings. The Treaty Parties seem unlikely to heed these resolutions. Reforms within the Treaty System are the most likely means of progress for the critics, althoough Australia's critique of the Minerals Convention has introduced an element of uncertainty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document