Antarktis- en politisk frizon eller en politisk gråzon? : - En studie av Antarktis politiska situation utifrån tre perspektiv påinternationella relationer

Sammanfattning: Being the only continent in the world that hasn´t been exposed to human expansion, Antarctica has for decades functioned as a center for a science-focused project grounded in peace and transnational cooperation. The institutional conditions of the continent are explained in the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, in which it says that human exploitation and territorial claims in Antarctica are forbidden. By using a combination of a content analysis and a case study, this study has aimed to explain why the political situation of Antarctica is in this way. Empirical evidence has been drawn from a workshop held in 1985, a workshop which purpose was to discuss and problematize The Antarctic Treaty and Antarctica’s political situation. When analyzing the content of this workshop, three theoretical perspectives of international relations have been used as analytical tools. These being the liberal, the realist and the Marxist perspective. To varying degrees, all these managed to explain why the political situation of Antarctica is the way it is. If you look at the explicit claims made in the workshop, the liberal perspective seemed to be most applicable. However, if you take into consideration the history of human activity in Antarctica, a Marxist interpretation seems to be more appropriate. The realistic perspective may be applicable as well, but not to same degree as the other two. Regardless, it looks like a reconsideration of Antarctica’s political situation and changes in The Antarctic Treaty might be required sooner or later. This due to the palpable resource crisis that Dodds et.al. says that mankind will face in a not-so-distant future.