Antarctic implications of the new law of the sea

Abstract

Abstract The impact of ideas adopted at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) on current discussions of Antarctica's future demonstrates how changes in one international regime can affect the evolution of another. By 1975, changed fish and oil markets had increased interest in Antarctic resources to the point where participants in the Antarctic Treaty system could no longer follow their older policy of ignoring resource issues. However, the results of UNCLOS III made it more difficult to solve the problem by simply adding supplementary agreements dealing with those issues. Expansion of coastal state jurisdiction made Antarctic claims more valuable, stiffening claimant‐state efforts to win economic concessions for their continued acceptance of the compromise on soverignty at the heart of the Antarctic Treaty. This development has intensified the one disagreement among the parties capable of destroying the regime from within. Simultaneously, notions of common heritage adopted for the deep seabed encouraged attack from without. A number of third world governments have endorsed proposals to replace the Antarctic Treaty system with a UN management body. Yet as long as the Antarctic Treaty participants remain united they will determine Antarctica's future because the third world coalition lacks the power to dislodge them.