Desarrollo de la Antártica

Brian Roberts I INTERNATlONAL COOPERATlON FOR ANTARCTIC ••• international organizations having a scientific or technical interest in Antarctica; 6. The conservation of living resources; 7. The establishment of preliminary inl.ernational machinery to bring about these objectives by period;cal Consultative Meetings. To these ties 1 would add twO' é'.dditional bonds which are not embodied in the rrreaty but which have developed under its aegis: 8. A realization that the fmits of scientific co-operation, available to aH, inestimably enhances tht; value of each nation's scíentific effort, and 9. A realization, stemming from thc knowledge gained by w-oper– ation, that fue Antarctic environmtnt is sensitive to mishandling so that those who are aware of Lhe dangers should retain the major voice in its development. These basic objectives have since been elaborated and refined in a series of Recomendations to governments. Let us begin with sorne brief thoughts about the progress made with each of the first seven O'bjectives since rhe Treaty carne in to force in 1961. First (and most important). Peace has been kept in a very large and potentially explosive area of the world during a period of great international tension. The so-calleel "rold war" in the rest of the world has -been kept out of the arc-a south of lato 60 0 S. The Treaty is justifiably heId in high regard as a considerable political achievement. 1t not only froze ,he legal status quo regarding conflicting claims to territorial sovereignty, but, significantly, was the first post-war multinational treaty d substance tO' involve the Soviet Union. ,Second. Freedom of scíentific investigation and international co– operation to this end under the umhrella of t'he Treaty has gone forward exceptionalIy well. There llave been a large number of very successful joint international investigations of problems that were too large for any one nation to deal with satisfactorily. The co· ordination oí research projects has been fostered by the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Researoh ( SCAR.) , about whose work we have been hearing from Dr. Peter vVelkuft and Dr. Tore Gjelsvik. This group, sponsored by the International Councíl of Scientific Unions (ICSU), has alsO' provided a most valuable -indeed 1 would caH it an essential- source of independent scientific advice to govermnents. 1 think we should be careful not to underestimate the very great 337