By Muhammad Shehzad Khan
The Antarctic region is full of resources and several territorial claims have been made in this regard by different countries. For the last 65 years the Antarctic treaty has been in place in international governing system. However, since the beginning the treaty in itself has many loopholes and many vague sorts of statements. It is because of this vagueness there has been a weak governing system for the treaty, lacking a centralized authority, thus robust enforcement is not present. As the world is depleting with natural resources rapidly, states are eying on the resources of this preserved region. Hence, there has been an increased militarization of Antarctic region and there is no mechanism to avoid conflict between the states in future. The treaty’s 1st provision allows the Antarctic region to be used for peaceful purpose, but the term peaceful is not defined. This vagueness is very problematic as the geopolitical needs of world powers are rapidly evolving. With newest technologies in place, that can be used for peaceful as well as other purposes The danger, that these dual use technologies can trigger a race over there which can dilute the region, is very high. For the induction of newest technologies in the militaries, world power can use this region for the satellite controls and alternatives to GPS that can be used in warfare as well. For example, establishing semiconductor regimes over there. Semiconductors are of great use not just for the civilian purposes but also for the militaries. They’re the Essential component of Radar systems. So, nobody knows a signatory country of Antarctic treaty is taking the semiconductors there for peaceful purposes but that turn out to be used in radars for the militaries.
Many of the equipment for scientific research is legitimate under the Antarctic treaty but can be used otherwise. Modern science has to be dependent on satellite technology. Moreover, for gathering and transmission of information, Antarctic ground stations are of great importance. Also, the equipment like ice-penetrating radars used in aircraft, drones, and autonomous airborne vehicles are important to understand the Antarctic region too but can be used as technology for dual purpose. Other technologies like ball bearing, Drones, chemical and biological tools etc. can also be used as dual use. Thus, instigating an arm race over there. Moreover, in Antarctic treaty the second provision of scientific research exempts the prohibition for military related research, which can be used to justify military related activity as well there. This can be very problematic as it can help signatories establish military bases and to do military exercises there.
In addition, the 5th provision of the treaty does prohibit the nuclear testing over there but as the governing body is weak and no mechanism is to bind the states from not doing, there is a high risk of nuclear waste disposal in the region raising a concern for nuclear contamination. Nonetheless, the 1st provision about the use of technology for peaceful purposes is so much vague that it can be molded anyway. The treaty explicitly does not prohibit the nuclear technology, thus allowing nuclear installations for peaceful energy purposes which can be reverted for otherwise purposes. Also, there is a chance of nuclear contamination because Pakistan, Israel and north Korea do have the weapons of mass destruction and since they’re not bound to the provisions of the treaty that prohibits nuclear activity over there.
Another issue that stands out is of Non-compliance to the treaty .On one hand it can be interpreted as illegal for non-signatories’ member to conduct any research or do expeditions there, but it also exempts those non signatories’ members to do whatever they want as they’re not part of the treaty thus can’t be held accountable, like in 1981 India not being the member state of the treaty illegally paid a research expedition to the region lead by a marine biologist .This was done on an ice breaker that was taken from Norway.. Though India later became the part of consultative regime, but this does give the tendency to other non-member state to go and expedite
The number of member countries of Antarctic treaty is 58 as of 2025, which was 12 in 1959 as an original document. Out of this 58 ,29 have the consultative status that they can participate in decision making. While the remaining 27 have non consultative status and can’t participate in decision making but only can attend the meeting. Although the regime has successfully stopped the exploitation of Antarctic region still this number is very small, thus thread is still there and further envisages in future.
To sum up, though the treaty has for years conserved the Antarctic region, but it has serious loopholes. The risk of militarization in the region is very high and there must be road map for the future. Some vague statements discussed above must be amended by following the procedures. As the world is facing the increasing pressures of climate change, resource depletion and geopolitical tension, the treaty must be seen again, avoiding any military exploitation there.
About Author
Muhammad Shehzad khan is a student of International Relations from University of Punjab. His areas of interest are American foreign policy, nuclear politics, international security. Moreover, he also works as content writer at the Opinion. He can be reached at shehzaday484@gmail.com
