No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting , supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica or create any rights of sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nDespite the popular clich\u00e9, the Treaty didn’t \u2018freeze\u2019 the claims, with the implication they’re somehow suspended. It’s not the claims<\/em> that are frozen, but the disruptive argument about<\/em> them which is set aside.<\/p>\nWhile it’s true that both the US and the Russian Federation have reserved the right to make their own claims (which may or may not include parts of the AAT\u2014they haven\u2019t said), the Treaty stops them. It\u2019s clearly to our advantage to have secured the AAT ahead of the Treaty. The Treaty therefore protects Australia\u2019s sovereignty and our security interests in the adjacent region to the south.<\/p>\n
So if the status quo<\/em> is protected, why be alert to the sovereign interest? Because it can still give us influence, just as it did while negotiating the Treaty and in later developments. But over 50 years the Treaty has grown from 12 to 50 nations, diluting our influence in the Treaty\u2019s consensus system. Changing interpretations and expectations stand to weaken us.<\/p>\nWe risk getting left behind. East Antarctica is no longer on the dormant side of Antarctica, away from the hustle of the Antarctic Peninsula and the Ross Sea regions\u2014Russia is coming out of hibernation in the AAT and the aspirations of China continue to grow. We have three small coastal stations. China, a relative newcomer, is proposing its third station in the AAT. We have no presence at all in our neglected Eastern Sector. Effective occupation as a measure of sovereignty might be questioned.<\/p>\n
Operationally our reach is short. We have never visited, or rarely visit, great lengths of the AAT coast. There are vast expanses in the AAT we can\u2019t even get to. Others can conduct science or observations throughout the AAT and assign foreign names to places we\u2019ve never seen.<\/p>\n
A potential issue for Australia is one of inertia or complacency\u2014accepting that the norms of the last 50 years of the Treaty will apply indefinitely. The threats to the AAT might come not from a direct challenge by others\u2014the Treaty protects our position\u2014but \u00a0from ourselves, should we take our eye off the ball as developments incrementally change the playing field.<\/p>\n
Some things Australia can do:<\/p>\n
\nact with confidence in a way that a sovereign nation might be expected to act, taking advantage of opportunities to advance our position<\/li>\n position Australia as the lead nation in the AAT, with the widest operational reach, the best science, the most effective environmental protection measures, the most comprehensive maps and the best information about the region<\/li>\n defend and strengthen the Antarctic Treaty system as the best means of Antarctic governance, and for protecting our sovereignty and Antarctic security interests<\/li>\n challenge misconceptions that suggest that Antarctic claims are dormant or decreasing relevance<\/li>\n promote the AAT in the Australian consciousness. Give it a flag. And, just occasionally, wave it.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nAndrew Jackson is an h<\/em>onorary fellow at the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre.\u00a0Image courtesy of\u00a0Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities\u2019 Antarctic Division<\/a>.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Guest editor Anthony Bergin Eighty years ago Australia received from Great Britain its largest ever gift: six million square kilometres of Antarctica. Three years later it became the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT). 42% of the …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":5833,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[199,17,435],"class_list":["post-5823","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-antarctica","tag-australia","tag-sovereignty"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Antarctic sovereignty: are we serious? | The Strategist<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n