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.

The United Nations and Antarctica, 1992: still searching for that elusive convergence of view

Polar Record ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 29 (171) ◽  
pp. 313-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Community ◽  
Agenda 21 ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Type Formula ◽  
Natural Reserve ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
Environment And Development ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Meaningful Role

ABSTRACTThe tenth successive annual UN session on the ‘Question of Antarctica’ took place at the close of 1992. The UN First Committee considered the topic during the week following the close of the Seventeenth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting held at Venice. The passage of yet another resolution critical of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) suggested that little had changed as compared to previous sessions. However, during 1992, UN reports and discussions displayed evidence of a growing acknowledgement of a range of ‘positive’ developments on the part of the ATS, most notably the benefits accruing from the Protocol on Environmental Protection's designation of Antarctica as ‘a natural reserve, devoted to peace and science’ in which mining is prohibited. Significantly, both critics and the German spokesman for the Antarctic Treaty parties (ATPs) — individual ATPs still refused to participate in either the UN discussions or vote because of their belief that the UN has no meaningful role to play in the affairs of a region subject to a valid international legal regime—expressed satisfaction with the concerted approach towards Antarctica embodied in Agenda 21 of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), which met at Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. As a result, ATPs agreed to ensure that research products were freely available to the international community. In December 1992 the adoption of UN resolution A47/57 reaffirmed the continuing divide between ATPs and other members of the international community regarding the management of Antarctica, even if the UNCED–type formula offers one route back to consensus when the UN takes up the topic again at the close of 1993.

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 and Antarctica, 1996: maintaining consensus towards the millennium

Polar Record ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 34 (188) ◽  
pp. 39-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Beck
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
The State ◽  
Consensus Approach ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Scientific Questions ◽  
Antarctic Environment

AbstractThe thirteenth UN session on the ‘Question of Antarctica,’ held at the close of 1996, saw the reaffirmation of the consensus approach restored in 1994. One brief session of the First Committee, followed by the General Assembly's adoption of resolution A51/56 without a vote, signified the continued acceptance by UN members, including Antarctic Treaty Parties (ATPs), of the benefits of an agreed approach towards the ‘Question of Antarctica.’ Resolution A51/56, acknowledging the broader international community's interest in the continent, marked the ATPs' willingness to allow a limited UN role in Antarctica. UN members, identifying the merits of further research on environmental and scientific questions, pressed the case for a comprehensive report on the state of the Antarctic environment, as discussed at recent Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings. The ‘Question of Antarctica,’ having moved from annual to biennial UN discussions in 1994, has now been put on a three-year cycle; thus, it will not be placed on the UN agenda again until the close of 1999.

Legitimacy in Antarctic governance: The stewardship model

Polar Record ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 358-360
Author(s):  
Nils Vanstappen
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Community ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Governance Model ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Antarctic

AbstractThe international community’s interest in the governance of Antarctica has long been recognised. Consideration of this interest has even been one of the pillars of the Antarctic Treaty System’s legitimacy. The Antarctic Treaty, for example, famously claims to serve “the interest of all mankind.” Yet, exactly how the international community is given a voice in Antarctic deliberations remains unclear. This contribution argues that – with the idea of direct United Nations involvement having been squarely rejected – stewardship could best describe the existing governance model as well as offer a normative framework to assess the system’s legitimacy.

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 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.

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 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document