The legitimacy of territorial claims in the Antarctic

This study examines the legitimacy of the various national territorial claims that have been asserted in the Antarctic, utilizing both legal and geopolitical factors in its assessment. The background of each national claim is first examined, citing in each case the various defenses advanced by the seven claimants--the U.K., Argentina, Chile, France, Australia, New Zealand, and Norway. Legal justifications for these claims derive from three legal cases--the Island of Palmas, Clipperton Island, and Legal Status of Greenland cases--each of which is examined in light of its application to Antarctic territorial claims. The principle of effective occupation, utilized by each of the claimant states, is considered in terms of its applicability to the Antarctic situation and the validity of that application. Numerous geopolitical factors, such as climatic, geographic, economic, and political factors, are considered and their impact on the future of territorial claims is examined. The thesis concludes with a summation of the various arguments against the application of territorial sovereignty and the role of decision-making power in the Antarctic and its impact on the future of the claims.