Five Eyes strategic interests in Antarctica: implications of contemporary Russian and Chinese strategy

IF 0.8 Q2 AREA STUDIES

Polar Journal Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI:10.1080/2154896X.2023.2205239

Mathieu Boulègue

{"title":"Five Eyes strategic interests in Antarctica: implications of contemporary Russian and Chinese strategy","authors":"Mathieu Boulègue","doi":"10.1080/2154896X.2023.2205239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Geopolitical tension in the Antarctic is not a new feature, and the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) is not about to crumble.1 Nevertheless, the region is slowly shaping to become a ‘contested space’2 in the presence of Russia and China. Taken individually and together, Moscow’s and Beijing’s postures and actions in Antarctic affairs are reshuffling the cards of good governance and consensus-based decisions in the ATS. Of particular interest is the relationship both countries have towards Antarctic affairs and the challenge they represent individually and jointly for the Five Eyes and its intelligence community. This article examines the respective Antarctic strategies of Russia and China. It then considers both Moscow and Beijing’s assessment of the Antarctic Treaty System in terms of its utility and durability. The article compares and contrasts the two states approaches to Antarctica to consider the implications for Five Eyes (FVEY) intelligence community. It concludes that within FVEY countries, keeping unity and coherence within the ATS is the best way to contain Russia’s and China’s regional ambitions – provided necessary measures are in place to keep track of their activities there.","PeriodicalId":52117,"journal":{"name":"Polar Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":"71 - 85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polar Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2023.2205239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Geopolitical tension in the Antarctic is not a new feature, and the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) is not about to crumble.1 Nevertheless, the region is slowly shaping to become a ‘contested space’2 in the presence of Russia and China. Taken individually and together, Moscow’s and Beijing’s postures and actions in Antarctic affairs are reshuffling the cards of good governance and consensus-based decisions in the ATS. Of particular interest is the relationship both countries have towards Antarctic affairs and the challenge they represent individually and jointly for the Five Eyes and its intelligence community. This article examines the respective Antarctic strategies of Russia and China. It then considers both Moscow and Beijing’s assessment of the Antarctic Treaty System in terms of its utility and durability. The article compares and contrasts the two states approaches to Antarctica to consider the implications for Five Eyes (FVEY) intelligence community. It concludes that within FVEY countries, keeping unity and coherence within the ATS is the best way to contain Russia’s and China’s regional ambitions – provided necessary measures are in place to keep track of their activities there.

查看原文本刊更多论文

南极“五眼”战略利益：当代俄罗斯和中国战略的启示

摘要:南极地区的地缘政治紧张局势并不是一个新现象，南极条约体系(ATS)也不会崩溃然而，在俄罗斯和中国的存在下，该地区正在慢慢形成一个“竞争空间”。无论是单独还是共同考虑，莫斯科和北京在南极事务上的姿态和行动，都在重新洗牌ATS的良好治理和基于共识的决策。特别令人感兴趣的是两国在南极事务上的关系，以及它们各自和共同为“五眼联盟”及其情报机构带来的挑战。本文考察了俄罗斯和中国各自的南极战略。然后，它考虑了莫斯科和北京在效用和持久性方面对《南极条约体系》的评估。本文比较和对比了两国在南极洲的做法，以考虑对五眼(FVEY)情报界的影响。它的结论是，在FVEY国家内部，保持ATS内部的统一和一致性是遏制俄罗斯和中国地区野心的最佳方式——前提是采取必要措施跟踪它们在那里的活动。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Polar Journal Arts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)

CiteScore

2.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Antarctica and the Arctic are of crucial importance to global security. Their governance and the patterns of human interactions there are increasingly contentious; mining, tourism, bioprospecting, and fishing are but a few of the many issues of contention, while environmental concerns such as melting ice sheets have a global impact. The Polar Journal is a forum for the scholarly discussion of polar issues from a social science and humanities perspective and brings together the considerable number of specialists and policy makers working on these crucial regions across multiple disciplines. The journal welcomes papers on polar affairs from all fields of the social sciences and the humanities and is especially interested in publishing policy-relevant research. Each issue of the journal either features articles from different disciplines on polar affairs or is a topical theme from a range of scholarly approaches. Topics include: • Polar governance and policy • Polar history, heritage, and culture • Polar economics • Polar politics • Music, art, and literature of the polar regions • Polar tourism • Polar geography and geopolitics • Polar psychology • Polar archaeology Manuscript types accepted: • Regular articles • Research reports • Opinion pieces • Book Reviews • Conference Reports.