By 1959 the Cold War and the space race were well under way. In September of that year, the Soviet Union sent the first spacecraft to the Moon's surface. In October Washington was jolted again when a Soviet spaceship took the first photographs of the Moon’s dark side. The superpowers were jockeying for supremacy in places near and far. Even Antarctica had become a potential hotspot.
Both the United States and Russia claimed their explorers had been the first to see Antarctica close up, during expeditions in 1820. Both were among the handful of countries that would lay early claims to parts of the icy continent. Even the Nazis, in 1939, tried to stake a claim, littering the ice with metal swastikas during an aerial survey.
But by the late ’50s there was another force at work: science. The governments of 67 nations had allowed their scientists to co-operate on a massive study of the Earth and its surroundings for International Geophysical Year (IGY) in 1957-58. Top priorities were outer space and Antarctica. In the polar region 12 countries, including Australia and the US, took the lead in putting everything from cosmic rays to glaciology under the microscope.
As groundbreaking discoveries ensued, US president Dwight Eisenhower proposed a means by which “this same kind of cooperation for the benefit of all mankind shall be perpetuated". On December 1, 1959, the Antarctic Treaty was signed in Washington by the 12 IGY countries.
Sixty years on, there are 54 parties to the treaty, with Slovenia the most recent signatory in April.
What do nations want in Antarctica? Who owns it? What are the rules? And what are the tensions in the coldest, windiest and driest place on Earth?
Who owns Antarctica?
The world's fifth-largest continent is one of those realms, like outer space and the deep sea, that is owned by no nation and where ambiguity is the order of the day. Contrary to the idea that it has been carved up like an icy pie, slices of the continent have been claimed at various times by seven countries.
Some claims, such as those of Argentina, Chile and Britain, overlap. All claims were frozen in time when the Antarctic Treaty entered into force, although not all countries recognise them. Russia and the United States don’t, although they officially reserve the right to make claims of their own.
There are now 29 nations operating across the claims, as well as in an unclaimed slice. The largest territory, Australia’s, is the site of three main permanent Australian stations – Mawson, Casey and Davis – as well as hosting Russian, Indian, French-Italian and Chinese stations. Australian laws apply there – but only to Australian nationals.
“Australia’s Antarctica estate, including the land claim and the 200-mile nautical zone (a product of having the land claim), is about 8 million square kilometres,” says Dr Julia Jabour from the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania. “They are not going to give it up – because in the future, some time, they may want to inhabit it or to exclude others who use resources there. Each claimant would have a similar reason for wanting to maintain their claim.”
The US and Russia’s position would be that “they want to claim the lot – maybe or maybe not – at some point in the future”.
Raising the US flag in Antarctica, 1961. Source: Charlie Dean Archives
So how do nations function in Antarctica?
Nations operate under the Antarctic Treaty system, which put a halt to conflict over territorial claims and “poured cold water on any militarisation that might have occurred”, says former Australian Antarctic Division head Tony Press.
“Surprisingly short but remarkably effective” is how the British Antarctic Survey describes the treaty.
“Its simplicity is one of its strengths,” says Dr Press, now an Adjunct Professor in the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania. “It sets aside the whole of the area below 60 degrees south as a place of peace and co-operation.”
The treaty also says scientific personnel and their discoveries should be shared among nations in Antarctica. That spirit of co-operation has largely endured, says Dr Press, who describes the atmosphere as “very international, very open, very warm”. As well as scientists, there are engineers, mechanics, chefs, doctors and so on; the total number of people in Antarctica ranges from about 4400 in summer to 1100 in winter, according to the CIA World Factbook.
“Most countries, particularly in a wide, open area like East Antarctica, actually rely on the logistics of others,” says Dr Press.
Is military activity banned there?
Yes. “It is a demilitarised area,” says Press, “in so far as military manoeuvres are banned, military conflict is banned, the testing of weapons [including nuclear] is banned.” So are military bases and fortifications, and any “measures of a military nature”.
What is not banned is the use of military personnel or equipment “for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes”.
This has become complicated since 1959.
“Satellite technology is now central to Antarctic operations and research,” notes Anthony Bergin, a senior fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), in a report commissioned by the Australian and French governments. “The inland environment of Antarctica is optically very clear and ideally suited for astronomic and space research. It is also remarkably quiet, with little human radio interference.
“With technological developments in information processing, nanotechnologies and astrophysics, research is now possible in Antarctica that was inconceivable in past years. Much of that research also has military applications.”
Under the treaty, every country has an unfettered right to inspect another country’s activities and facilities. “Now whether that’s been done well enough, often enough and comprehensively enough – that’s a question many could ask,” says Dr Press. “Inspections are expensive, logistically difficult – those sort of things play into why every facility in Antarctica isn’t inspected every two years.”
For 2018-19, the only inspection registered on the Antarctic Treaty Secretariat database was by Argentina and Chile, who looked at US, Bulgarian and Ukrainian stations and a port run by the UK. Australia last led an inspection in 2016-17; it was of the US Amundsen-Scott station and protected area. In his report, Anthony Bergin recommends that Australia (and France) conduct more frequent inspections.
Nations must also report what equipment and personnel they are using in Antarctica. “Most countries do report," says Dr Press, "but how good that reporting is, how transparent and comprehensive, is something that’s up for discussion.”
In wind and snow, scientists plow on. Source: Ice on the Line, Australian Antarctic Division, 2019
What do nations want in Antarctica?
In a rare criticism of the treaty system in the 1980s, when the prospect of mining in Antarctica was raised, Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad argued on behalf of the G77 coalition of developing nations that instead of the continent being run by a "select group" of states, all territorial claims should be surrendered and the United Nations given control under a new treaty.
“Mahathir accused the treaty of being an old boys’ club and being secretive – and he was absolutely right,” says Dr Jabour. She says Malaysia was subsequently invited to treaty meetings and its scientists sponsored by Australia, New Zealand and the US on expeditions. Malaysia joined the treaty in 2011.
Membership of the polar club is a thing. Other relatively recent joiners include Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Portugal and Iceland, who are non-consultative members, which means they go to meetings but are not formally involved in making decisions.
Among consultative members – those whose presence in Antarctica has qualified them to be involved in decision-making – building stations is another fillip. China, for example, is currently building its fifth station, on Inexpressible Island in the Ross Sea. This might be strengthening their position for the future but “whenever China builds another base it’s reported as ‘staking a claim’ in Antarctica and, legally, that’s simply not the case,” says Dr Jabour.
Iran has also investigated acceding to the treaty, she says, although US sanctions might lead to them suspending their plans.
The view from Russian icebreaker Akademik Ioffe. Source: Adventures All Around, 2015.
What resources do nations want?
Mining may be big in the Arctic but in Antarctica it has been banned indefinitely since the Madrid Protocol came into effect in 1998. Still, the presence of minerals may be a scintillating prospect for some nations, especially if melting ice leaves more land exposed. (“If you want to find out what minerals there are in Antarctica, just look at Australia,” says Dr Press, who points out that the two continents were once joined.) Bergin describes the ban as "a long-term investment that will require assertive diplomacy to maintain".
More of an existing going concern is bio-prospecting – leveraging the often-remarkable qualities of specially adapted Antarctic species of creatures and micro-organisms to make drugs. Once a micro-organism is found, synthetic versions can be made in laboratories. Anti-freeze proteins, for example, were discovered in a family of fish called notothenioids in the 1960s.
Tourism is also on the rise, with about 55,000 people projected to visit in 2018-2019, not including overflights, according to the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators. In the previous season, when 51,000 people visited, one-third were from the United States, nearly 16 per cent were from China and 11.2 per cent were from Australia, attracted by the majestic scenery, exotic creatures and frontier frisson. China, which sub-charters tourist boats, has now placed orders for its own expedition ships, says Bergin. While there are no hotels, as such, packages advertised online include flying in to stay in luxury eco-friendly “pods”.
Fishing is shaping up to be a source of tension, as it in many multilateral agreements. “Antarctic krill is a resource that will most likely become the centre of increased exploitation well before any push to overturn the prohibition on mining,” says Bergin. Norway, South Korea and China are among the biggest catchers of krill; whales, seals, penguins, seabirds and other fish also rely on them for food. China is doubling down on its investment in the tiny, omega-3-rich crustaceans, with one Chinese firm launching what it claims is the world’s biggest purpose-built krill-fishing vessel, complete with state-of-the-art freezing technology.
China and Russia have consistently opposed bids to create marine sanctuaries in Antarctica, most recently blocking them in November at a meeting of CCAMLR (the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources), which requires consensus for a proposal to pass.
Other future challenges will include keeping tabs on illegal and unregulated fishing, says Bergin. While the illegal targeting of Patagonian toothfish has dropped off, the potential remains for new players to enter the scene. Warming oceans may cause some types of fish to migrate further south while depleted fisheries in other parts of the ocean may cause fishing vessels to head south too.
Tiny Antarctic krill are big business for humans. Source: Oceanities
With the world in huge flux, “one of the fears of the existing consultative parties is that the new kids on the block will come in with completely different norms, completely different ideas about the intent and the value of the treaty … and that will shake up everything,” says Dr Jabour.
Dr Press cites Beijing and Moscow’s objections to the proposals for marine protected areas as pressure points. If what he characterises as the current “stalling” over these plans becomes entrenched, “that poses a problem for the overwhelming majority of Antarctic Treaty partners because it means one or two thwart the good intentions of the collective”.
A scientist cuts an "ice core" sample, which will provide a snapshot of past climate conditions. Source: Natural History Museum, UK
The biggest physical threat facing Antarctica is, of course, climate change.
“At the moment, we are learning every day more and more about the impacts,” says Dr Jabour. “We’ve identified the sea temperature rise and air temperature rise, ocean acidification, the reduction of sea ice and land ice. That science is really valuable and it legitimises scientists being in Antarctica.”
Bergin warns of the dangers of complacency and benign neglect. “States participating in the Antarctic Treaty System are operating under global conditions of uncertainty,” he says. “That puts a premium on establishing systems that can adapt to changing circumstances ... in an area of the world that is of critical importance to understanding the wider global environmental system.”