Why did we get an International Space Station before an International Antarctic Station?
This question, posed by Alan D. Hemmings back in 2011, seems to be more topical than ever today.
Of the 70-plus active research stations run by over 29 countries across the Antarctic continent, just one represents a coalition of more than one nation. Despite the obvious advantages that international cooperation brings to scientific progress, such collaboration seems resoundingly scarce here. This leaves many asking: is Antarctica really the continent ‘devoted to peace and science’ it’s made out to be?
Recent developments certainly suggest otherwise. Having vetoed proposals to help preserve Antarctic marine life at a conference last month, the motives behind Russia and China’s Antarctic interests have come under particular scrutiny. This comes off the back of the opening of China’s 5th Antarctic station earlier this year, strategically positioned in the ice-free Ross Sea, in a prime location for any future exploitation of natural resources. RosGeo, Russia’s state-run geological company, alluded to this very possibility following a recent survey that they say revealed 511 billion barrels of oil locked within the Antarctic seas. As climate change presents new opportunities for resource exploitation in the Antarctic, an appetite for international cooperation is being eroded in favour of national interests. Evidently, for Russia, China and all those with a scientific presence in the region, a strict ban on mining has done little to quash their economic and political ambitions.
This seems a far cry from the original internationally cooperative intent that the system of Antarctic governance was meant to embody. Whilst the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 was ground-breaking in its suspension of territorial claims in the interests of scientific cooperation, growing geopolitical tensions threaten its longevity.
As the world watches the same states that collaborate on the International Space Station shun cooperation in the Antarctic, the power of territorial tensions comes to the fore. In the absence of sovereignty disputes and resource wars, space exploration emerges as an avenue for international cooperation in a way that Antarctic research has never been.
2048 marks the point at which the Treaty’s 1998 Environmental Protocol can be opened for discussion. The question looms: will this important moment increase the geopolitical heat in Antarctica’s frozen climbs? Or are there hopes for the likes of an International Space Station on ice?