FROM THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA, THE PERSIAN GULF, THE SOUTH ATLANTIC TO ANTARCTICA, IT’S ALL ABOUT NATURAL RESOURCES

Antarctica

BRITISH INCREASED PRESENCE ON THE MALVINAS – FALKLAND ISLANDS IS PRIMARILY ABOUT FAST ACCESS TO THE ANTARCTICA, OIL EXTRACTION AND FISHERY INDUSTRY INTERESTS

IT’S ABOUT  ANTARCTICA 

Se trata de la ANTÁRTIDA

Recientes actitudes belicistas alrededor de  las Islas Malvinas  entre Gran Bretaña y ARGENTINA, en vísperas del 30 aniversario de la guerra de Malvinas, no tienen que ver con la defensa de los isleños y el resto de la retórica de Gran Bretaña de confrontación que utiliza para justificar sus acciones recientes. Se trata de  los descubrimientos de petróleo, los intereses de la industria pesquera y para asegurar un fuerte militar en el Cono Sur con el fin de tener acceso rápido a la Antártida el momento que el Tratado Antártico se convertirá en nulo y una carrera para la explotación de los recursos naturales y la extracción resultará en guerra  "entre los países que reclaman el territorio en el continente. Esto conducirá muy probablemente a los enfrentamientos armados y por lo tanto, Gran Bretaña, con sus  bases en  MALVINAS  tendrá una ventaja militar para proteger a la fuerza sus intereses nacionales.

Recent warmongering over the MALVINAS - FALKLAND Islands between BRITAIN and ARGENTINA on the eve of the 30^th anniversary of the FALKLAND –MALVINAS war are not about the defense of the Islanders and the rest of confrontational rhetoric’s BRITAIN uses to justify its recent actions. They are  about latest oil discoveries, fishing industry interests and to ensure a military stronghold on the SOUTHERN CONE in order to have quick access to the ANTARCTICA the minute the ANTARCTIC TREATY becomes void and a run for natural resource exploitation and extraction will result in quarrels’ between countries claiming territory on the continent. This will most likely lead to armed confrontations and thus BRITAIN, with its MALVINAS – FALKLAND base will have a military advantage to forcefully protect its national interests. 

  

ARE ANTARCTICA NATURAL RESOURCES WORTH THE QUARREL?

SON LOS RECURSOS NATURALES ANTARTICOS LO SUFICIENTEMENTE VALIOSOS PARA LA GUERRA?

Antártida contiene el 75% del agua dulce del mundo. Se encuentra libre de contaminación. También cuenta con gran cantidad de recursos naturales como la flora y la fauna, minerales, petróleo, carbón, etc.

Se cree que el continente antártico tiene grandes depósitos de minerales, combustibles (aproximadamente 45.000 millones de barriles y ~ 115 billones de pies cúbicos de gas) y carbón (~ 11% del total mundial). Esto se puede comprobar mediante el uso de la técnica moderna y sofisticada para la evaluación de los recursos. A partir de ahora, la minería está prohibida en la Antártida. Los países miembros del Tratado Antártico (1959) han firmado el tratado para la no explotación de los recursos antárticos, y ayuda a mantener el continente libre de conflictos.

Sin embargo, debido a la creciente población humana y la necesidad de recursos en el futuro, es obvio que para el año 2040, la Antártida se convierte en el objetivo final para la explotación de recursos diversos.

ANTARCTICA holds 75% of the world’s fresh water.

(See http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com/2011/06/water-golden-commodity-of-future.html)

It is free from pollution. It also has enormous amount of natural resources such as fresh water, flora and fauna, minerals, oil, coal etc. 

It is believed that ANTARCTIC continent have large deposits of minerals, oils (~45,000 million barrels and ~115 trillion cubic feet of gas) and coal (~11% of the world’s total). This can be ascertained by using sophisticated modern technique for resource assessment. As of now, mining is banned in ANTARCTICA. The member nations of ANTARCTIC TREATY (1959) have signed the treaty for non-exploitation of ANTARCTIC resources and helps in keeping the continent free of conflicts.

However, due to increasing human population and the need for resources in future, it is obvious that by the year 2040, ANTARCTICA will become the final target for various resources exploitations.

BACKGROUND:

ARGENTINA’S foreign minister has accused the UK of deploying nuclear weapons near the disputed MALVINAS - FALKLAND Islands, militarizing the South Atlantic. Hector Timerman voiced the accusations as he lodged a formal protest with the UN. He said ARGENTINA had intelligence that BRITAIN had deployed a Vanguard class submarine in the area.

“Thus far the UK refuses to say whether it is true or not,” he told a journalists in New York. “Are there nuclear weapons or are there not? The information ARGENTINA has is that there are these nuclear weapons.”

Britain’s ambassador to the UN would not officially comment on disposition of BRITISH submarines, but called ARGENTINEAN allegations of UK’s militarization “manifestly absurd.” UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon said in a statement that he was concerned with the escalating row between ARGENTINA and BRITAIN over the MALVINAS - FALKLAND Islands. Earlier the BRITISH media reported that UK had deployed a Trafalgar-class nuclear-powered submarine armed only with conventional weapons to the region.

The tension between the two countries has surged in the run-up to the 30th anniversary of the MALVINAS - FALKLANDS War. Back in April 1982, ARGENTINA tried to take control of the islands, and claims as its rightful territory. BRITAIN repelled the attack with military force. More than 900 people were killed in the hostilities.

The current row has been brewing since at least 2010, when BRITISH companies started drilling for oil in the region. Argentina has put diplomatic and commercial pressure on the islands’ administration. Buenos Aires recently convinced LATIN AMERICAN countries no ban ships bearing the MALVINAS -FALKLAND Islands flag from their ports, troubling their supply logistics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Falkland_Islands

TESTS OF THE ANTARCTIC TREATY 

The ANTARCTIC TREATY set the base line for peace and security. But the treaty was necessary for a reason. Furthermore, the Treaty has undergone revision in order to maintain peace in an ever-evolving international environment.

The initial reason for an Antarctic Treaty was the overlapping claims of seven nations, BRITAIN, FRANCE, DENMARK, AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, CHILE and ARGENTINA to ANTARCTICA. War was inevitable when three countries claimed the same slice of the continent. The unknown value of the territory made the grab for territory even more contentious.

The ANTARCTIC TREATY rectified this situation by refuting all territorial claims to ANTARCTICA. However, this possibility still remains. The seven nations, although all original signatories of the Treaty, still nominally claim their sovereign territories. Furthermore, the UNITED STATES and RUSSIA, should the treaty structure fail, reserve the right to acquire territory. Hence, the infrastructure that supports the Treaty, and the additions and allow it to remain flexible become even more important. 

The next test for ANTARCTIC came in 1988, when an addition to the Treaty was proposed to regulate mining in ANTARCTICA. It was believed that oil reserves, as well as natural gas may be trapped underneath the eternal tundra and ice that covers the continent. Plans were made to enforce "safe" mining techniques, and study the environmental impacts mining had on the rare ecosystem. 

International outrage over the proposal was so strong, that many governments began to change their minds over the initiative. FRANCE and AUSTRALIA began to echo calls from other nations to make ANTARCTIC a global park. Nations in the UN argued that the environmental problems that ANTARCTIC would face would eventually face the world. When the initiative came to a vote, it was defeated. Instead, the consultative nations of the ANTARCTIC TREATY decided on the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the ANTARCTIC TREATY, commonly known as the MADRID PROTOCOL, in 1990. The Protocol first and foremost establishes ANTARCTICA as a natural reserve. Furthermore, it prohibits mining, and establishes a system for getting new scientific research approved by the Secretariat for international approval. 

One perpetual problem the Treaty faces is exclusivity. The Treaty precludes from consultative status (or voting status) any nations that do not have an on-going scientific program in ANTARCTICA. Repeated calls in the General Assembly have yet to lead to an opening up of the treaty. Despite the allowance of the UNEP to observe, poorer nations are being secluded from decision making on ANTARCTIC based on their poverty. ANTARCTIC cannot become a "global park" unless the entire globe is allowed to participate. In short, since what happens in ANTARCTICA does not stay in ANTARCTICA, these nations feel it is imperative that they should be allowed a say in the decisions that ultimately affect everyone. It is this dispute that puts the most pressure on the framework of Antarctica, and prevents other areas from being designated as an international territory.