The Antarctic exception: sovereignty and the Antarctic Treaty governance

• Ano de defesa: 2017
• Autor(a) principal: Sampaio, Daniela Portella
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: eng
• Instituição de defesa: Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP
• Palavras-chave em Português: Antarctica; Antártica; Governança; Governance; Regional international society; Soberania; Sociedade internacional regional; Sovereignty
• Link de acesso: http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/101/101131/tde-21062017-163536/

This thesis discusses the undefined condition of sovereignty in Antarctica and its implications for the governance of the region. Antarctica emerged into international society with the expansion of its primary institutions in the nineteenth century. Sealing and whaling were the first practices and identities to develop, followed by exploration and scientific expeditions to the continent. Knowing and controlling the Antarctic region promised not only commercial supremacy at the beginning of the twentieth century, but also the reinforcement of national desires for imperial greatness. Sovereignty claims were stated by Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom, but not mutually recognised. This conundrum established the foundation of Antarctic politics until the present day. Claimants have pursued to demonstrate authority in any way possible, and have been confronted not only by rivals\' overlapping claims but also by the Soviet Union and the United Sates, potential claimants who did not recognise sovereignty without effective occupation, but who did save their own rights to make claims in the future. The impossibility to reach a common agreement was solved by instituting a permanent non-solution: the Antarctic Treaty established a governance where claimants and potential claimants maintained control over decision-making. Its diplomatic culture constituted a social system which preserved the original power-configuration through consensus, slow institutional transformation and limited participation from other actors. As fields of activity that did not define sovereignty, scientific research and environmental protection were raised as Antarctic principles. They have legitimised the Treaty to international society, as peace has been maintained in the region. However, as the main decision-makers, claimants and potential claimants have reassured their leading roles by their scientific and environmental performance, as experience and expertise are seen to be indispensable qualities for those engaging in a region as exceptional as Antarctica. Since sovereignty and territoriality were not subject to norm localisation in the same way as that found in international society, Antarctica was defined as an exceptional place, demanding an exceptional governance framework for claimants and potential claimants as the ultimate authority in the region. By explicitly making sovereignty an undefined article, the Treaty configures a regional international society made exceptional in order to preserve its original authority.