Historic treaty still keeping Antarctica on ice
Flashback
Today Antarctica is known for its diverse wildlife, picturesque scenery and scientific riches. However, had it not been for the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, things might have looked a lot different at the bottom of the world.
As a claimant to the Ross Dependency, New Zealand was one of the 12 original parties to the multilateral agreement, which sought to ensure Antarctica would be ‘‘used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become the scene or object of international discord’’.
The short treaty document, which came into force on June 23, 1961, consisted of 14 articles outlining what could and could not be carried out on the continent.
At the time of the signing, New Zealand was the only claimant state prepared to surrender its territorial claims in Antarctica, with Prime Minister Walter Nash stating that he would ‘‘have wished to see the conference agree on a more imaginative and more adventurous approach to the problems arising from claims to sovereignty in Antarctica’’.
Despite his offer not being taken up, Nash – alongside representatives from Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, Norway, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States and the USSR – signed on the dotted line during a conference in Washington DC.
Professor Karen Scott, head of law at the University of Canterbury, says the United States’ support of the treaty, which effectively banned all military activity on the continent, came as something of a surprise at the time.
‘‘This was negotiated at the height of the Cold War, and, only a few years before, the US had suggested Antarctica be used as an area for testing nuclear weapons so this [treaty] was a remarkable turnaround and a way of maintaining balance and control of the main powers at the time.
‘‘The decision was taken to make it nuclear-free, so under Article 5 no nuclear explosions were permitted, and nuclear waste couldn’t be disposed of either.’’
While that decision was one that ultimately benefited the Antarctic environment in the long term, Scott says the treaty fell short in several other ways.
‘‘The Antarctic Treaty itself didn’t have a huge amount to say about protection of the environment, which seems surprising nowadays when we think of environmental protection being fundamental in Antarctica.
‘‘[However] post-1959, the suite of Antarctic measures has been developed significantly to address marine resources in particular, as well as environmental protections,’’ she says.
The Antarctic Treaty does not recognise any sovereign nation’s claim to any part of the Antarctic territory; instead it promotes international co-operation while enabling each party to preserve its position on questions of territorial sovereignty.
‘‘The treaty essentially allowed the seven states with claims, plus the other states, to all work together.’’
Since coming into force 57 years ago, the treaty has acceded to dozens of other nations. The total number of parties is now 53.
The 12 original members of the agreement, alongside other participants conducting substantial research activity in Antarctica, are known as the ‘‘consultative parties’’ to the treaty.
Each year, they attend an Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM), at which they exchange information and consult on Antarctic matters of common interest.
The treaty remains hugely significant, says Scott, ‘‘with the principles within it just as relevant as when it was signed in 1959, particularly around things like demilitarisation and a dedication to peaceful purposes’’.