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.

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 United Nations and Antarctica, 2002: ‘constructive engagement’ between the Antarctic Treaty System and the United Nations

Polar Record ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The Past ◽  
Draft Resolution ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Constructive Engagement ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

At the close of 2002, the United Nations (UN), acting in accordance with its 1999 resolution A54/45, returned to the ‘Question of Antarctica,’ which is currently being placed upon the agenda of the General Assembly's First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) every three years. In 2002, the First Committee's discussions, informed yet again by a report produced by the UN Secretary-General (UNSG) updating members about recent Antarctic developments, reaffirmed the varying perspectives existing within the international community about the management of Antarctica. Following statements delivered by the Polish delegate on behalf of the Antarctic Treaty Parties (ATPs) and the Malaysian representative, the First Committee adopted another consensus draft resolution. Subsequently, the UN General Assembly, acting by consensus without a vote, formally adopted the First Committee's draft as resolution A57/51, which basically updated the wording of that adopted in 1999. Thus, the UNSG was instructed to produce another report to guide the next UN session on the ‘Question of Antarctica’ scheduled for 2005. Although the UN discussions on the topic in 2002 proved relatively brief and low key, the actions of Malaysia during the past year or so have raised a number of questions about the future course of the ‘Question of Antarctica,’ given its lead role in first raising the topic at the UN in 1983 and then maintaining pressure upon 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.

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.

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.

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.

Antarctica at the United Nations, 1985: the end of consensus?

Polar Record ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 23 (143) ◽  
pp. 159-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Consensus Approach ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
The Future ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Bridge Building ◽  
The Antarctic

ABSTRACTThe question of Antarctica was discussed at the United Nations General Assembly in 1985 for the third successive year. While the content of the debates differed little from that of previous years, the discussions resulted in the adoption, by large majorities, of three resolutions in favour of an expanded and up-dated UN Study on Antarctica, the provision of information for the UN on the Antarctic minerals regime negotiations, and the exclusion of South Africa from the Antarctic Treaty System. The Antarctic Treaty powers, favouring no real UN role in Antarctica, stressed the need to maintain the present arrangements and did not participate in the UN votes on the three resolutions. The apparent breakdown of the consensus approach that was characteristic of 1983 and 1984 raises a question for the future; will 1986 witness bridge-building or continuing divisions on the most appropriate way to manage Antarctica in the future?

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.

Improving the Operation and Functioning of the International Criminal Tribunals

2000 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
pp. 759-773 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl A. Mundis
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
International Tribunals ◽  
The United Nations

Since the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, both International Tribunals have grown tremendously in terms of resources. Despite this growth, the International Tribunals have rendered judgments in only fifteen cases and conducted inordinately long trials—a fault for which, perhaps more than any other, they can be justly criticized. The Secretary- General of the United Nations recently appointed an expert group to review the efficiency of the operation of the International Tribunals and make recommendations for improvement. Following the release of the group's report, the General Assembly requested that the Secretary-General obtain comments from the International Tribunals on the experts’ recommendations. The ICTYjudges, for their part, considered these recommendations in a report to the United Nations setting forth a long-term strategy for improving the operation of the Tribunal.

Secretariat: Annual Report of the Secretary-General

1966 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-137 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Annual Report ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Article 59 ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
History Of ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Direct Concern

In his Introduction to the Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization, 16 June 1964–15 June 1965 Secretary-General U Thant noted that the ten months under review had without doubt been difficult ones in the history of the United Nations. The opening date of the nineteenth session of the General Assembly had been postponed several times and, when it did meet, it had been unable to follow the normal rules of procedure due to the controversy over the applicability of Article 59 of the UN Charter. Another regrettable development of direct concern to the UN had been the announcement by Indonesia of its decision to withdraw from the Organization as from January 1, 1965.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document