Ever since mankind began to map the world, the North and South poles have fascinated us, both poetically and scientifically. But, save for a few whalers and explorers, not many people ever went to have a closer look. The serene stillness of the Arctic and Antarctic was a perfect match for human indifference. The onset of global warming, however, has changed everything.
Of course, that old indifference was not universal. In a rare spurt of collective political intelligence, and in order to prevent any risk of international conflict, an international treaty was signed in 1959 to govern Antarctica. This treaty dedicated Antarctica to exclusively peaceful aims. It recognized the existing territorial claims, declared them “frozen,” and forbade all physical assertions of sovereignty on the land of Antarctica.
The nature and content of that treaty were purely diplomatic. Only after its ratification did the first environmental issues arise. These were added to a revised treaty in 1972 by a convention on seal protection, followed, in 1980, by a convention on wildlife preservation. Most importantly, a protocol signed in Madrid in 1991 dealt with protecting the Antarctic environment.
As French prime minister, together with Australia’s then prime minister Robert Hawke, I was responsible for proposing the Madrid Protocol, which transformed the Antarctic into a natural reserve dedicated to peace and science for 50 years, renewable by tacit agreement. It was not an easy success. We had to reject first a convention on the exploitation of mineral resources that had already been negotiated and signed in Wellington in 1988, thus risking reopening very uncertain negotiations. We were bluffing, but our bluff worked.
The Antarctic environment is now effectively protected by the international community, which is the de facto owner of this continent, without any national differentiations. It is the only such case in the world. Indeed, international lawyers who are seeking to define the legal status of outer space — Who will own the moon? Who will own the resources that may one day be extracted there? — often look to the “Antarctic treaty system” for precedents and analogies.
But Antarctica had one great advantage, compared with the Arctic, which is now in peril: There were only penguins in Antarctica, not voters, especially voters of different nationalities.
Antarctica, though a huge continental archipelago, measuring 24 million square kilometers and covered in ice that is 4km to 5km thick, is far from any inhabited continent. The Arctic is only water, with the North Pole itself 4,200m under the surface. But five countries are very close: Norway, Russia, the US, Canada and Denmark (via Greenland, which will become independent in the coming years).
Throughout most of human history, ice almost completely barred all navigation in the seas surrounding the North Pole, and the Arctic was asleep in a silent indifference. Everything has changed radically during the last three years. The International Panel on Climate Change has established that global warming is not uniform: Whereas temperatures rose, on average, by 0.6˚C in the 20th century, the increase in the Arctic region was 2˚C.
Some estimates suggest that about 20 percent of the world’s total oil reserves lie under the Arctic. Last year, for the first time in human history, two navigation channels through the polar ice field — in the east along Siberia, and in the west along the Canadian islands — were open for a few months, allowing boats to go from Europe to Japan or California via the Bering Strait, rather than the Panama Canal or the Horn of Africa, thereby saving some 4,000km or 5,000km.
Given global warming, this may now become a regular occurrence: Thousands of ships will pass through the Arctic passages, emptying their fuel tanks and causing oil slicks and other forms of pollution. This poses a real threat to the Eskimo and Inuit populations, as well as to polar bears.
Moreover, according to the Convention on the Law of the Sea, countries enjoy absolute sovereignty in the first 12 nautical miles (about 20km) of their coastal waters sea, and almost absolute sovereignty, limited by a few conventions, within 200 nautical miles of their coasts. Any country that can prove that the seabed beyond 200 nautical miles is an extension of the continental shelf on which it is sovereign can claim sovereignty over it as well.
Russia, which three years ago used a submarine to plant a platinum copy of its national flag at the North Pole, claims sovereignty over 37 percent of the surface of the Arctic Ocean. The territories claimed by Russia include the North Pole and a huge oil field. If this oil is exploited, the pollution risks will be far higher than anywhere else. And could Russia, given its rearmament policy, be planning to set up underwater missile launch sites?
It is therefore urgently necessary to negotiate a treaty that guarantees peace and environmental protection in the Arctic region. It will probably be very difficult to achieve, but the effort should be viewed as a great cause for humankind.
Michel Rocard, former French prime minister and leader of the Socialist Party, is a member of the European Parliament.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
In an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday was handcuffed and escorted by police to the Taipei Detention Center, after the Taipei District Court ordered that he be detained and held incommunicado for suspected corruption during his tenure as Taipei mayor. The ruling reversed an earlier decision by the same court on Monday last week that ordered Ko’s release without bail. That decision was appealed by prosecutors on Wednesday, leading the High Court to conclude that Ko had been “actively involved” in the alleged corruption and it ordered the district court to hold a second detention hearing. Video clips
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) arrest is a significant development. He could have become president or vice president on a shared TPP-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ticket and could have stood again in 2028. If he is found guilty, there would be little chance of that, but what of his party? What about the third force in Taiwanese politics? What does this mean for the disenfranchised young people who he attracted, and what does it mean for his ambitious and ideologically fickle right-hand man, TPP caucus leader Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌)? Ko and Huang have been appealing to that