THE Antarctic Treaty ushered in an era of peace and co-operation, but can it safeguard against the growing demands placed on the frozen continent?
Andrew Darby, The Age, 6th April
IN DIPLOMATIC language, it was a roasting. Australia boxed Argentina’s ears for blocking a tough new step against pirate fishing in Antarctica. “We used to be world leaders in combatting (illegal) fishing,” Australian delegation head Dr Tony Press told the Antarctic Treaty’s fisheries organisation in November. “We have gone from being innovative to ‘dumb and dumber’.”
The annual pillage of Southern Ocean toothfish was estimated at 100,000 tonnes, valued at $700 million at its peak a decade ago. Slowly illegal fishers have been subdued with armed enforcement by countries such as Australia, and through international law from the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, part of the treaty system.
But the more determined illegals steamed further south, in among the icebergs, and to this day still take thousands of tonnes of fish, valued at tens of million of dollars. Some is stolen from waters off the Australian Antarctic Territory where Australia claims an exclusive economic zone. But a basic bargain of the 50-year-old Antarctic Treaty is that all territorial claims are set aside in favour of joint governance by organisations such as the conservation commission.
With evidence that fishing grounds were still collapsing in 2008, Australia backed an EU plan for market sanctions that would hit the illegals financially. Argentina stood against this on principles of international law that few grasped. Treaty decisions are taken by full agreement, and so that was that. After three years’ work, the plan failed. “We have become hostage to the tyranny of consensus on this issue,” Press rumbled.
…
But commerce doesn’t necessarily wait for consensus. Escalating polar tourism is running near to disaster in Antarctica. The pursuit of marine resources is relentless. Mineral exploitation and climate change loom, and territorial claims are being ignored or squabbled over. All these issues are in turn highlighting some of the shortcomings of the treaty — and fuelling the call to give it more muscle.
Full story aat: http://www.theage.com.au/environment/white-noise-20090405-9t92.html
