Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and
March 10, 2021
Environmental Issues
Pervaze A. Sheikh
Geopolitical and environmental developments are increasing international focus on Antarctica
Specialist in Natural
and the Southern Ocean. Stakeholders contend these developments may have political, economic,
Resources Policy
and security implications for the United States and the rest of the world. Geopolitical concerns

center on the rising presence of China and Russia in the Antarctic and the integrity of the
Bruce Vaughn
Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), which provides a framework for governing the region.
Specialist in Asian Affairs
Environmental issues, particularly those related to climate change, also are prominent in

Antarctica, due to current and projected future rates of melting ice in the region, which cause
some scientists to assert that Antarctica represents a significant source for global sea-level rise
Kezee Procita
under future warming conditions. Much of the research on understanding and projecting rates of
Senior Research Librarian
melting ice and its potential contribution to global sea-level rise relies on satellite data, as well as

scientific work conducted in Antarctica. Most of the research done by U.S. scientists is overseen
and funded by the National Science Foundation. Other environmental issues in Antarctica

concern its ecosystems, biodiversity, and natural resources.
The Antarctic Treaty, the central part of the ATS, established the legal framework for Antarctica and guaranteed free access
and research rights for the international community. The Antarctic Treaty was signed in 1959. There are 54 parties to the
treaty; of these, 29 are consultative parties, which have the right to participate in decisionmaking. The consultative parties
include the United States, Australia, Russia, and China, among others. In its preamble, the Antarctic Treaty states that “it is in
the interest of all mankind that Antarctica shall continue to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become
the scene or object of international discord.” The treaty also set aside all previous claims to land in Antarctica, essentially
making it a common area for research activities.
Congressional interest in Antarctica stems to a large extent from geopolitical and environmental issues. Members introduced
legislation in the 116th Congress that would have regulated expeditions and tourism activities in the region and addressed
environmental emergencies (e.g., oil spills) in the Antarctic ecosystem that result from such activities. The former Trump
Administration addressed security concerns in the region, issuing a presidential memorandum that called for a new fleet of
polar security icebreakers to protect national interests in the Arctic and Antarctic regions. In the future, geopolitical, climate,
and natural resources concerns in Antarctica might stimulate Congress to explore a number of questions related to the region,
including what role Antarctica may play in the changing global order and its significance for sea-level rise.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 4 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 9 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 16 link to page 19 link to page 20 link to page 22 link to page 23 link to page 23 link to page 24 link to page 25 link to page 25 link to page 25 link to page 27 link to page 28 link to page 29 link to page 8 link to page 16 link to page 20 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 13 link to page 29 Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
The United States and Antarctica ................................................................................. 2
Antarctic Treaty System ............................................................................................. 3
Antarctic Treaty ................................................................................................... 3
Geopolitical Environment................................................................................................. 6
Natural Environment ....................................................................................................... 8
Climate Change and Air Temperatures .......................................................................... 8
Melting Ice ............................................................................................................. 10
Changing Mass of the Antarctic Ice Sheet and Glaciers ............................................ 11
Melting Ice and Sea-Level Rise ............................................................................ 13
Sea Ice Extent .................................................................................................... 16
Biodiversity ............................................................................................................ 17
Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty.................................... 19
Fisheries ................................................................................................................ 20
Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources ...................... 20
Pollution ................................................................................................................ 21
Mineral Resources ................................................................................................... 22
Issues for Congress ....................................................................................................... 22
Geopolitical Considerations ...................................................................................... 22
Natural Resource Considerations ............................................................................... 24
Melting Ice and Sea-Level Rise ................................................................................. 25
Antarctica and COVID-19 ........................................................................................ 26

Figures
Figure 1. Il ustration of Antarctica with Historical Claims ..................................................... 5
Figure 2. Ice Mass Changes in Antarctica, 2003-2019 ......................................................... 13
Figure 3. Antarctica’s Lowest Daily Sea Ice Extent of the Year (1979-2020) .......................... 17
Figure 4. Location of Current Emperor Penguin Colonies in Antarctica and Their
Projected Vulnerability in 2100 .................................................................................... 18

Tables
Table 1.Glossary of Key Terms ....................................................................................... 10

Contacts
Author Information ....................................................................................................... 26

Congressional Research Service

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Introduction
Geopolitical and environmental developments are increasing international focus on Antarctica
and the Southern Ocean. The interdisciplinary nature of various stakeholders concerned with
Antarctica—including scientists, diplomats, defense personnel, members of the media,
academics, and others in both domestic and international contexts—makes for a complex
dynamic. Some of these stakeholders contend that current developments could have
environmental, political, economic, and security implications for the United States and the rest of
the world.1
For example, estimates of current and projected rates of melting ice sheets and glaciers in
Antarctica cause some scientists to assert that the region represents one of the largest potential
sources for global sea-level rise under future warming scenarios.2 Sea-level rise can have
significant effects on coastal cities and infrastructure in the United States and other parts of the
world, absent human measures to mitigate or adapt to these effects, according to stakeholders.3
Geopolitical concerns center on the rising presence of China and Russia in the Antarctic and the
integrity of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), which provides a framework for governing the
region. Antarctica is not occupied or claimed by any country, and it is governed through the
Antarctic Treaty. There have been few reports of incidents that conflict with the treaty; however,
some stakeholders note there is potential for disagreements regarding the extraction and
protection of natural resources in and around the continent (e.g., fisheries), the physical footprint
of bases and access to them, and the nature of activities conducted by countries in the region.4
During the 116th Congress, the Trump Administration and some in Congress addressed U.S.
interests in Antarctica in several ways. The Trump Administration issued a presidential
memorandum stating that the United States requires a fleet of polar security icebreakers that are
tested and deployable by FY2029 to protect national interests in the Arctic and Antarctic regions.5
Some in the 116th Congress demonstrated interest in Antarctica through legislation under Title VII
of the Securing American Leadership in Science and Technology Act of 2020 (H.R. 5685), which
would have addressed, in part, expeditions and tourism in Antarctica and environmental
emergencies in the Antarctic ecosystem that result from such activities. As of the publication of
this report, there are no bil s in the 117th Congress that specifical y address Antarctica.

1 Leah Feiger and Mara Wilson, “T he Countries T aking Advantage of Antarctica During the Pandemic: While the West
Has Scaled Back Operations in the Antarctic, Russia and Ch ina Have Pushed Ahead,” The Atlantic, May 15, 2020.
Hereinafter, Feiger and Wilson, “ Countries T aking Advantage.”
2 T his observation is based on the extent and thickness of land ice on Antarctica. Peter Fretwell et al., “Bedmap2:
Improved Ice Bed, Surface, and T hickness Datasets for Antarctica,” The Cryosphere, vol. 7 (2013), pp. 375-393; and
Julius Garbe et.al., “T he Hysteresis of the Antarctic Ice Sheet,” Nature, vol. 585 (September 24, 2020), pp. 538-544.
Hereinafter, Garbe, “Antarctic Ice Sheet.”
3 Michael Oppenheimer et al., “ Sea Level Rise and Implications for Low-Lying Islands, Coasts and Communities,” in
IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Clim ate , IPCC, 2019. Hereinafter, Oppenheimer et
al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “ Sea Level Rise.”
4 For example, see Jackson Gothe-Snape, “China Unchecked in Antarctica,” ABC News, April 12, 2019. Hereinafter,
Gothe-Snape, “ China Unchecked.”
5 White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Memorandum on Safeguarding U.S. National Interests in the Arctic and
Antarctic Regions,” presidential memorandum, June 9, 2020.
Congressional Research Service
1

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Geopolitical, climate, and natural resource concerns in Antarctica might stimulate Congress to
explore a number of questions related to the region, including what role Antarctica may play in
the changing global order and its potential to contribute to sea-level rise.
The United States and Antarctica
Scientific interest in the Antarctic began in the 1800s, with various countries sending exploratory
expeditions. One of the first recorded sightings of Antarctica was by the American sealer
Nathaniel Palmer on November 16, 1820.6 The congressional y authorized Charles Wilkes
expedition (1838-1842) was instrumental in establishing that Antarctica was a continent.7 In
1898, members of a Belgian expedition were the first to winter in the Antarctic in their ship,
frozen in ice.8 The following year, a British expedition spent the winter on land.9 In 1904, the
United Kingdom set up a weather station in the South Orkney Islands that is stil functioning.10
The U.S. presence in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean began with American whaling and
sealing in the region in the early 1900s. In 1939, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed
Admiral Richard Byrd to lead the U.S. Antarctic Service Expedition, which established scientific
bases on the continent.11 (These bases were evacuated in 1941.) Operation Highjump (1946-1947)
and Operation Deep Freeze (1955-1957) subsequently reestablished a sizable American presence
in Antarctica after World War II.12
Today, U.S. research on Antarctica is coordinated through the U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP),
which is funded and managed by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The USAP has three
stated research goals: “to understand the region and its ecosystems; to understand its effects on
(and responses to) global processes such as climate; and to use the region as a platform to study
the upper atmosphere and space.” Approximately 3,000 Americans participate in USAP research
activities annual y.13 USAP, through NSF, operates three stations in Antarctica—the McMurdo
Station, the Amundsen-Scott Station, and the Palmer Station on the Antarctic Peninsula. (Overal ,
there are about 80 other stations operated by foreign countries in Antarctica.) USAP conducts
research on: space weather, which informs global weather forecasting; ocean circulation patterns
and carbon sequestration in oceans; astrophysics; and ice sheet dynamics and their implications
for global sea-level rise.14

6 Cool Antarctica, “Human Impacts on Antarctica and T hreats to the Environment —Whaling and Sealing,” at
https://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/science/threats_sealing_whaling.php.
7 Gillen D’Arcy Wood, “T he Forgotten American Explorer Who Discovered Huge Parts of Antarctica,” Smithsonian
Magazine, March 26, 2020.
8 Cool Antarctica, “Adrien de Gerlach – Belgica Belgian Antarctic Expedition 1897-1899,” at
https://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/History/antarctic_whos_who_belgica.php.
9 Cool Antarctica, “Carsten E. Borchgrevink – Southern Cross, British Antarctic Expedition 1898-1900,” at
https://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/History/antarctic_whos_who_southern_cross.php.
10 Geoffrey N. Swinney, “T he Scottish National Antarctic Expedition (1902-04) and the Founding of the Base
Orcadas,” Scottish Geographical Journal, vol. 123, no. 1, (March 2007), pp. 48-67. T he Orcadas Base is operated by
the Argentine government.
11 “Byrd Antarctic Service Expedition,” at http://www.south-pole.com.
12 Scott Polar Research Institute, “ United States Navy Antarctic Expeditions Operation Deep Freeze 1955 -98,” at
https://www.spri.cam.ac.uk/picturelibrary/catalogue/usnaeodf1955-98/.
13 National Science Foundation (NSF), “United States Antarctic Program,” at https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/antarct/
usap.jsp.
14 Kelly Falkner and John Carlstrom, “ Antarctica: U.S. Research and Diplomacy on the Southern Continent ”
(presentation, Wilson Center, Washington, DC, November 13, 2020) , at https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/antarctica-
Congressional Research Service
2

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Various other federal and military organizations contribute to U.S. involvement with Antarctica.
U.S. policy on Antarctica is coordinated by the Department of State, which maintains ties with the
Antarctic Treaty Secretariat, located in Buenos Aires, Argentina. U.S. Air National Guard crews
provide air support for the Antarctic research bases, flying from Christchurch, New Zealand, and
the U.S. Coast Guard operates icebreakers in Antarctica to support U.S. interests and activities .15
The United States Coast Guard icebreaker Polar Star supports the USAP’s mission on Antarctica
by breaking ice to refuel and resupply McMurdo Station.16
Selected U.S. Laws Addressing Antarctica
Congress has passed a series of laws to conserve living resources and ecosystems on Antarctica, protect marine
resources in waters surrounding Antarctica and the Southern Sea, and protect mineral resources.
The Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-623; 16 U.S.C. §§2431-2444) authorized
the United States to carry out its obligations under the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention, including
the implementation of measures to conserve marine resources and the promulgation of regulations to implement
the act.
The Antarctic Protection Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-594; 16 U.S.C. §§2461-2466) aimed to strengthen the
environmental protection of Antarctica; prohibit mineral extraction; and urge other nations to join the United
States in an agreement to ban mineral resources extraction and in the conservation and protection of ecosystems
in Antarctica. Specifical y, Section 4 of the law states, “it is unlawful for any person to engage in, finance, or
otherwise knowingly provide assistance to any Antarctic mineral resource activity.” (Under the law, the term
person means “any individual, corporation, partnership, trust, association, or any other entity existing or organized
under the laws of the United States, or any officer, employee, agent, department, or other instrumentality of the
Federal Government or of any State or political subdivision thereof.”)
The Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-227; 16 U.S.C. §§2401-2413) made it
il egal (unless a permit is issued) for U.S. citizens and scientific expeditions originating from the United States to
take native fauna, enter Antarctic Special y Protected Areas, introduce species to Antarctica, introduce and
discharge waste, and import certain items to the United States or export them to other countries. The law
established a process for obtaining permits and set civil and criminal penalties for violations. Further, the law
provided that environmental impact assessments of federal activities on the continent must be done.
Antarctic Treaty System
The ATS consists of the Antarctic Treaty and a collection of agreements and conventions made to
regulate relations among countries associated with Antarctica. The core of the ATS is the
Antarctic Treaty; the other agreements include the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the
Antarctic Treaty, the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals, and the Convention on
the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources.
Antarctic Treaty
The Antarctic Treaty established the legal framework for Antarctica and guaranteed free access
and research rights for the international community. The treaty was signed in 1959 and entered

us-research-and-diplomacy-southern-continent . Hereinafter, Falkner, “ Antarctica.”
15 William Woitrya, Commanding Officer of the U.S. Coast Guard Polar Star, “ Antarctica: U.S. Research and
Diplomacy on the Southern Continent ” (presentation, Wilson Center, Washington, DC, November 13, 2020), at
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/antarctica-us-research-and-diplomacy-southern-continent; Cool Antarctica, “The
USA in Antarctica: T he History and Activity of the Americans in the Antarctic,” at https://www.coolantarctica.com/
Antarctica%20fact%20file/activity_of_USA_in_antarctica.php.
16 See CRS Report RL34391, Coast Guard Polar Security Cutter (Polar Icebreaker) Program: Background and Issues
for Congress, by Ronald O'Rourke.
Congressional Research Service
3

link to page 8 Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

into force in 1961, following the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate.17 The original treaty was
signed by the 12 countries active in Antarctica at the time.18 Currently, there are 54 parties to the
Antarctic Treaty; of these, 29 are consultative parties, which have the right to participate in
decisionmaking, and the rest are observers.19 Countries that conduct research in Antarctica may
apply to become consultative parties. Decisions under the treaty are made by consensus among
the consultative parties.
Geopolitical issues contributed to the creation of the Antarctic Treaty. At the time of the treaty’s
negotiation, the United States was concerned with the Soviet Union’s intentions in Antarctica,20
and seven countries held territorial claims in the region: Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New
Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom. Some historians note that land-grabbing and tensions
over competing claims led to the treaty’s creation.21 For example, when the treaty was signed in
1959, Australia had claimed 42% of the continent and the United Kingdom, Argentina, and Chile
had overlapping claims in the Antarctic Peninsula. As part of treaty negotiations, al seven
countries with territorial claims set aside but did not renounce their claims.22 (See Figure 1 for
the location of historical territorial claims.) The United States has not made a territorial claim on
the continent, though it “maintains a basis to claim territory in Antarctica.”23

17 T he Antarctic T reaty, 402 U.N.T.S. 71, entered into force June 23 , 1961. Also see Department of State, “Antarctic
T reaty,” at https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/avc/trty/193967.htm.
18 T he countries include Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa,
United Kingdom, United States, and the then-Soviet Union.
19 For a list of parties to the treaty and their consultative status, see Secretariat of the Antarctic T reaty, “Parties,” at
https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Parties?lang=e.
20 Doaa Abdel-Motaal, “High North and the Antarctic,” Handbook on Geopolitics and Security in the Arctic, ed.
Joachim Weber (Springer, 2020), pp. 363 -378. Hereinafter, Abdel-Motaal, “ High North and the Antarctic.”Abdel-
Motaal, “ High North and the Antarctic.”
21 Abdel-Motaal, “ High North and the Antarctic.”
22 T he Antarctic T reaty does not require parties to renounce previously asserted rights of or claims to territorial
sovereignty in Antarctica. Article IV of the T reaty.
23 Department of State, Antarctic Region, Office of Ocean and Polar Affairs, 2020, at https://www.state.gov/key-topics-
office-of-ocean-and-polar-affairs/antarctic/. Hereinafter, State, “ Antarctic Region.”
Congressional Research Service
4

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Figure 1. Illustration of Antarctica with Historical Claims
(claims are not recognized under the Antarctic Treaty)

Sources: Il ustration adapted by CRS from various sources, including Robert Keith Headland, “Territory and
Claims in the Antarctic Treaty Region: A Disquisition on Historical and Recent Developments,” The Cartographic
Journal, vol. 57, no. 2 (2020), pp. 160-174; and Klaus Dodds and Alan D. Hemmings, “Polar Oceans: Sovereignty
and the Contestation of Territorial and Resource Rights,” in The Earthscan Handbook of Ocean Resources and
Management, eds. Hance D. Smith, Juan L. Suárez de Vivero, and Tunday S. Agardy (Abingdon: Routledge, 2015),
pp. 576-591.
Notes: Claims are il ustrated by colored boundaries and are overlapping in some cases. Claims that border each
other show two lines on the border. Under the Antarctic Treaty, countries set aside their claims without
renouncing them. The United States has not made a claim in Antarctica and presently does not recognize foreign
territorial claims in Antarctica. The section on the map not bracketed by a boundary has not been claimed. The
white areas are ice shelves; the shaded areas are continental land.
The Antarctic Treaty provides the legal framework for the region south of 60º south latitude
(Article VI). In its preamble, the treaty affirms that “it is in the interest of al mankind that
Antarctica shal continue to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shal not become the
scene or object of international discord.”24 Article I of the treaty states that Antarctica “shal be
used for peaceful purposes only” and prohibits “any measures of a military nature.” Article II
states that the freedom of scientific investigation into Antarctica shal continue, and Article III
stipulates that data from scientific investigations are to be shared and made freely available. The
treaty, under Article IV, also provides that “no new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to

24 Secretariat of the Antarctic T reaty, “The Antarctic T reaty,” at https://www.ats.aq/e/antarctictreaty.html. (PDF of
Antarctic T reaty text available for download at https://documents.ats.aq/ats/treaty_original.pdf.) Hereinafter, Secretariat
of the Antarctic T reaty, “The Antarctic T reaty.”
Congressional Research Service
5

link to page 8 Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

territorial sovereignty in Antarctica shal be asserted while the present Treaty is in force.” 25 This
article was a compromise for not eliminating claims altogether, according to some analysts.26
Article V states that no nuclear explosions shal be conducted and no radioactive waste materials
shal be disposed of in Antarctica.27
Articles VII and VIII of the Antarctic Treaty al ow each party to designate observers to carry out
inspections of other parties’ facilities. Specifical y, the treaty states that each observer “shal have
complete freedom of access at any time to any or al areas of Antarctica.”28 This provision grants
observers access to stations, instal ations and equipment, and al ships and aircraft, and it affords
them the right to conduct aerial observations over any and al of Antarctica. Article IX states that
in pursuit of cooperation, consultative meetings of active signatories are to be held periodical y to
review measures and objectives in pursuance of the treaty. Article X states that contracting parties
shal ensure activities contrary to the treaty are not carried out. Article XI sets up a dispute
resolution process, emphasizing that disputes are to be settled by peaceful means (such as
arbitration, mediation, etc.) and not by force. Article XII provides a process for modifying the
treaty, which can be done through a majority vote of consulting parties. The remaining articles
provide details of ratification.29
Geopolitical Environment
Much has changed in global geopolitics since the Antarctic Treaty was signed in 1959. The Cold
War context, during which the treaty was signed, has evolved into an era increasingly defined by
the rise of China.30 Some observers believe China’s rise is altering the global geopolitical
landscape and raising questions about the sustainability and future of long-standing international
norms and power balances, with implications for every region of the world, including the polar
regions. In addition, some believe pressure may mount to exploit the Antarctic region’s resources
and efforts to claim land and resources might ensue. Others argue that Chinese development (e.g.,
science stations, tourism) in Antarctica is proceeding peacefully under the ATS framework.31
China’s Antarctic posture has increased dramatical y since 1983, when it ratified the Antarctic
Treaty.32 China gained consultative status in 1985 and has since developed its presence on the
continent through the construction of several research stations: Great Wal on King George Island
(1985); Zhongshan on Larsmann Hil (1989); Kunlun on Dome A, near the center of East
Antarctica (2009); and Taishan on Princess Elizabeth Land (2014). (See Figure 1.) Australia and
China signed a bilateral memorandum of understanding deepening their Antarctic relationship

25 Secretariat of the Antarctic T reaty, “The Antarctic T reaty.”
26 Gillian T riggs, “T he Antarctic T reaty Regime: A Workable Compromise or a Purgatory of Ambiguity,” Case
Western Reserve Journal of International Law, vol. 17, no. 2 (1985), pp. 195 -228.
27 Secretariat of the Antarctic T reaty, “The Antarctic T reaty.”
28 Secretariat of the Antarctic T reaty, “The Antarctic T reaty.”
29 Secretariat of the Antarctic T reaty, “The Antarctic T reaty.”
30 For example, see Nengye Liu, “Defining the ‘Rise’ of China in Antarctica,” Australian Outlook (blog), Australian
Institute of International Affairs, January 24, 2019. Hereinafter, Liu, “ Defining the ‘Rise.’”
31 Liu, “Defining the ‘Rise.”
32 Andrew Erickson, “Capsule Review: China as a Polar Great Power,” Foreign Affairs, vol. 97, no. 3 (May/June
2018); Anne-Marie Brady, China as a Polar Great Power (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017); David
Fishman, “China’s Advance into the Antarctic,” Lawfare (blog), October 27, 2019. Hereinafter, Fishman, “China’s
Advance.”
Congressional Research Service
6

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

during President Xi Jinping’s visit to Hobart, Australia, in 2014.33 Key elements of the
memorandum of understanding include China’s commitment to use Australia as a gateway to
Antarctica and the establishment of a joint committee to oversee cooperation.
In 2017, China released a report on its Antarctic activities, pledging more money for its own
scientific research and reaffirming its stance against commercial resource extraction in the
region.34 China also hosted the 40th Antarctic Treaty meeting in Beijing in 2017. In addition,
China discussed its plans to erect a fifth station on Inexpressible Island in Terra Nova Bay of the
Ross Sea; the station is under construction and expected to be operational in 2022. China also has
instal ed equipment in Antarctica related to its global satel ite navigation system, Beidou.35 The
voyage of China’s civilian icebreakers Xue Long and Xue Long 2 to the Southern Ocean in
November 2019 reportedly was viewed in China as marking a new era of the country’s Antarctic
exploration.36
These recent activities, in addition to an increased fishing presence in the region, prompted some
analysts to express concern that China is attempting to increase its influence in Antarctic
governance regimes.37 Some observers also posit that China’s increasing presence could form the
basis for a future territorial claim if the Antarctic Treaty is dissolved or modified.38 Reporting
from Australia has expressed concern over China’s expanding presence in Antarctica and asserted
that China is engaged in “undeclared military activities and mineral exploration.”39 Some
observers counter this claim by noting that although the Antarctic Treaty prohibits military
operations and mining on the continent, it al ows scientific research, communications, and
logistics, which could have military applications. They also contend there is no evidence that
China eventual y wil overturn the Antarctic Treaty.40
Other countries with a presence in Antarctica also are increasing their footprints in the region
through various activities.41 Russia, for example, reportedly is exploring offshore oil and gas
potential off the coast of Antarctica.42 Russia’s state-run geological survey Rosgeologia, surveyed

33 Australian Antarctic Program, Australia and China Strengthen Antarctic Ties, Australian Government, November
18, 2014, at https://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2014/australia-and-china-strengthen-antarctic-ties/.
34 Bai T iantian, “China Releases 1st Antarctic Paper,” Global Times, May 23, 2017.
35 Pratol Jakhar, “How China’s GPS Rival Beidou Is Plotting to Go Global,” BBC News, September 20, 2018; Claire
Young, “What Is China Up to in Antarctica?,” The Strategist, September 20, 2018.
36 Laura Zhou, “Chinese Icebreakers Set Sail for Antarctic Rendezvous T hat Will Herald ‘New Era’ of Polar
Exploration,” South China Morning Post, October 22, 2019.
37 For example, see Gothe-Snape, “China Unchecked,” and Nengye Liu, “What Does China’s Fifth Research Station
Mean for Antarctic Governance?” The Diplomat, June 28, 2018.
38 Bryan Clark and Jesse Sloman, Securing the Frontier: Challenges and Solutions for U.S. Polar Maritime Operations,
Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2017, at https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/CSBA6303-
Securing_the_Frontier_WEB.pdf. Hereinafter, Clark and Sloman, Securing the Frontier.
39 Anne-Marie Brady, China’s Expanding Antarctic Interests: Implications for Australia , Australian Strategic Policy
Institute, August 2017.
40 Nengye Liu, “T he Rise of China and the Antarctic T reaty System?,” Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean
Affairs, vol. 11, no. 2 (2019), pp. 120-131.
41 As of May 2017, Russia reportedly had 46 ice breakers, plus 11 under construction and 4 planned. T he United States
had five icebreakers and three planned, and China had three icebreakers and one under construction. See “ Major
Icebreakers of the World,” U.S. Coast Guard, at https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/DCO%20Documents/
Office%20of%20Waterways%20and%20Ocean%20Policy/20170501%20major%20icebreaker%20chart.pdf?ver=
2017-06-08-091723-907, as referenced in Charlie Gao, “ Russia’s Icebreaker Fleet Is About to Get Bigger and More
Dangerous,” The Buzz (blog), The National Interest, September 30, 2019.
42 In early 2020, Russia reportedly conducted its first seismic survey in Antarctica since the late 1990s. Feiger and
Congressional Research Service
7

link to page 25 Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

coastal areas off Antarctica’s Queen Maud Land “to assess the offshore oil and gas potential of
the area.”43 The ATS bans oil and gas exploration in and around Antarctica but al ows for
scientific research, which might include these activities.44 Some analysts note that Russia’s
activities could be viewed as potential y destabilizing and might cause concern that Russia aims
to claim oil and gas resources in the region when the ban on mineral extraction comes up for
review in 2048. (See section on “Mineral Resources,” below, for more information.)
Natural Environment
The continent of Antarctica has an area of 5.1 mil ion square miles (13.2 mil ion square
kilometers), equal to approximately one-tenth of the Earth’s land surface. Antarctica is
surrounded by the Southern Ocean and covered in ice. It is the coldest, windiest, and driest
continent on earth, receiving approximately 2 inches per year of precipitation averaged over the
continent.45 The glacial ice that covers more than 90% of the continent has accumulated over
mil ions of years and averages 7,087 feet (2,160 meters) in thickness, making Antarctica the
highest continent in the world.46 The Antarctic Ice Sheet (see glossary of key terms in the report)
is estimated to be about 6 mil ion cubic miles; it contains 90% of the world’s ice and 70% of the
world’s freshwater.47 The Antarctic region is home to penguins, whales, seals, sea lions, mosses,
algae, kelp, invertebrates, kril , and other marine communities.48
Climate Change and Air Temperatures
Antarctica’s unique characteristics contribute to its susceptibility to the effects of climate change.
Additional y, the volume of freshwater contained in its ice sheet makes it a potential y important
contributor to rising sea levels in this century and after.
Climate research on the continent reveals complex interactions between oceanic and atmospheric
circulation, the stratospheric ozone layer, annual snow levels, and long-term temperature trends.
Studies report that some regions—including Western Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula—are
experiencing potential y record high air temperatures, whereas other regions in Antarctica
continue to show high variability and no significant trends in temperature over time.49 For

Wilson, “Countries T aking Advantage.”
43 Robert Perkins and Rosemary Griffin, “Russia Stokes Political T ensions with Hunt for Antarctic Oil,” S&P Global
Platts, February 21, 2020, at https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market -insights/latest-news/oil/022120-russia-stokes-
political-tensions-with-hunt-for-antarctic-oil. Hereinafter, P erkins and Griffin, “ Russia Stokes Political T ensions.”
44 Perkins and Griffin, “Russia Stokes Political T ensions.”
45 Precipitation is not evenly distributed across the continent.
46 NSF, Office of Polar Programs (OPP), “Ice Sheets,” 2020, at https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/antarct/science/
icesheet.jsp. Hereinafter, NSF, OPP, “ Ice Sheets.”
47 NSF, OPP, “Ice Sheets.”
48 Australian Antarctic Program, “About Antarctica,” April 30, 2019, at https://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/
.
49 Kyle R. Clem et al., “Record Warming at the South Pole During the Past T hree Decades,” Nature Climate Change,
vol. 10, (2020), pp. 762-770 (hereinafter, Clem et al., “ Record Warming at South Pole”); M. K. Obryk et al., “ Climate
From the McMurdo Dry Valleys, Antarctica, 1986 -2017: Surface Air T emperature T rends and Redefined Summer
Season,” Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, vol. 125, (2020) (hereinafter Obryk et al., “Climate from
McMurdo Dry Valleys”); T urner et al., “Antarctic T emperature Variability and Change from Station Data,”
International Journal of Clim atology, vol. 40, (2019), pp. 2986-3007 (hereinafter, T urner et al., “ Antarctic T emperature
Variability”); Wang et al., “Internal Variability in Multidecadal T rends of Surface Air T emperature over Antarctica in
Austral Winter in Model Simulations,” Climate Dynamics, vol. 55, (2020), pp. 2835-2847 (hereinafter, Wang et al.,
Congressional Research Service
8

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

example, in February 2020, the Argentine research base Esperanza, located on the northern tip of
the Antarctic Peninsula, reported a record high temperature of 65.1°F (18.4°C), topping the 2015
record of 63.5°F (17.5°C).50 The Esperanza base has been recording temperatures since 1953.51
Also in February 2020, a Brazilian research station on Seymour Island reported a high
temperature of 69.3°F (20.75°C).52 (Neither temperature has been verified by the World
Meteorological Organization as a record high.53) Longer-term trends in surface air temperature
however, vary across the continent. According to the 2019 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (Hereinafter
referred to as the IPCC Special Report):
In contrast to the Arctic, the Antarctic continent has seen less uniform temperature changes
over the past 30–50 years, with warming over parts of West Antarctica and no significant
overall change over East Antarctica (Nicolas and Bromwich, 2014; Jones et al., 2016;
Turner et al., 2016), though there is low confidence in these changes given the sparse in
situ records and large interannual to interdecadal variability.54
General y, researchers note the complexities of isolating the extent to which human-induced
warming plays a role. Other factors influencing long-term surface air temperature trends include
atmospheric circulation, ocean warming, albedo, and stratospheric ozone, among others.55
Researchers note that increasing surface air temperatures may be due in part to warm tropical air
moving over Antarctica because of natural variations in atmospheric circulation cycles.56 They
state that these observed trends are within the upper bounds of natural variability and note that
increasingly warm tropical air, combined with climate variability and oscil ations in the Western
Pacific, highlight the complex nature of air temperature trends on the continent.57 Rising
temperatures can increase glacial melting, may destabilize portions of the ice sheet, and may
affect the habitats of native flora and fauna on the continent.

“Internal Variability in Multidecadal T rends”).
50 World Meteorological Organization, “New Record for Antarctic Continent,” February 14, 2020, at
https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/new-record-antarctic-continent-reported.
51 World Meteorological Organization, “WMO Region VII (Antarctica mainland & adjoining islands): Highest
T emperature,” at https://wmo.asu.edu/content/antarctica-highest-temperature-continent.
52 Jonathan Watts, “Antarctic T emperature Rises Above 20°C for the First T ime on Record,” Guardian, February 13,
2020, at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/13/antarctic-temperature-rises-above-20c-first-time-record.
53 World Meteorological Organization, “WMO Region VII (Antarctica mainland & adjoining islands): Highest
T emperature,” at https://wmo.asu.edu/content/antarctica-highest-temperature-continent.
54 Meredith et al., “Polar Regions” in IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate,
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2019, pg. 212, at https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/chapter-3-2/.
Hereinafter, Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Regions.” For an explanation on the use of
calibrated language to communicate confidence and likelihood in the IPCC Special Report see A bram et al., “ Framing
and Context of the Report” in IPCC, IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, 2019,
at https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/chapter-1-framing-and-context-of-the-report/1-9approaches-taken-in-this-special-
report/.
55 For example, see Clem et al., “Record Warming at South Pole”; Obryk et al., “Climate from McMurdo Dry Va lleys”;
T urner et al., “Antarctic Temperature Variability”; Wang et al., “Internal Variability in Multidecadal T rends”; and
Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Regions.”
56 Clem et al., “Record Warming at South Pole.”
57 Clem et al., “Record Warming at South Pole” and Chelsea Harvey, “Why Is the South Pole Warming So Quickly?
It’s Complicated,” E&E News, June 30, 2020, at https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2020/06/30/stories/1063477465.
Congressional Research Service
9

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Melting Ice
Antarctica holds substantial water resources in its ice sheet. As a result, some scientists assert that
the continent represents a significant potential source for global sea-level rise under current and
future warming conditions.58
When conducting research on polar ice, scientists measure both sea ice extent, comprised of
frozen ocean water, and ice sheet mass, comprised of freshwater. The surface of the ocean around
Antarctica freezes over in the winter and melts in the summer. The surface area of freezing ice
over the ocean is sea ice extent. Ice sheets (grounded on land) gain mass largely through snowfal
and lose mass through evaporation, iceberg calving, and melting.59
Table 1.Glossary of Key Terms
Ice Sheet
An ice sheet is a mass of glacial land ice (freshwater) extending more than
50,000 square kilometers (20,000 square miles). The two ice sheets on Earth
today cover most of Greenland and Antarctica.
Ice Shelf
An ice shelf is a floating sheet of ice (freshwater) that forms where a glacier or
ice flows into the sea. The shelf extends from the land and into the sea.
Gravity drives the movement of ice from the land to the shelf. Ice shelves lose
mass when chunks break off into the sea. The Antarctic Ice Sheet includes ice
shelves that are an extension of the ice sheet. When ice shelves col apse or
break off, they become icebergs and are no longer part of the ice sheet.
Sea Ice
Sea ice is frozen ocean water. It forms, grows, and melts in the ocean. For
most of the year, sea ice typical y is covered with snow. The area of sea ice in
a region is measured as sea ice extent.
Glacier
A glacier is mass of ice (freshwater) that originates on land and shows some
type of present or historical movement. A glacier can be part of an ice sheet.
Global Sea Level
Global sea level is the average height of the Earth’s oceans, as measured by
satel ite altimetry relative to a calculated reference el ipsoid.
Relative Sea Level
Relative sea level refers to the elevation of sea level relative to the land surface
from which it is measured. In many parts of the U.S. coastline and the
coastlines of other countries, the elevation of the land surface is changing, due
to a number of different causes. A change in relative sea level represents the
combination of the change in land surface elevation and the change in global
sea level.
Sea-Level-Rise Equivalent
Sea-level-rise equivalent is the change in global average sea level that would
occur if a given amount of water or ice were added to or removed from the
oceans.
Sources: CRS Report R44632, Sea-Level Rise and U.S. Coasts: Science and Policy Considerations, by Peter Folger and
Nicole T. Carter; National Snow and Ice Data Center, “Al About Sea Ice,” April 3, 2020, at https://nsidc.org/
cryosphere/seaice/index.html.

58 Garbe, “Antarctic Ice Sheet.”
59 Michon Scott, “Antarctica Is Colder T han the Arctic, But It Is Still Losing Ice,” National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), March 12, 2019, at https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/antarctica-colder-arctic-
it%E2%80%99s-still-losing-ice. T here are three methods to measure ice sheet mass: (1) the m ass budget/com ponent
m ethod, comparing melt outflow to snowfall accumulation; (2) the volum e change/geodetic m ethod, measuring changes
in glacier elevation; and (3) the gravim etric m ethod, detecting changes in the Earth’s gravity field over the ice sheet to
measure balance. T hese methods are largely calculated through indirect measurements made from satellites.
Congressional Research Service
10

link to page 16 Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Changing Mass of the Antarctic Ice Sheet and Glaciers
In multiple studies, scientists have concluded that rates of ice loss from the land-based Antarctic
Ice Sheet have increased in the early 21st century. The 2019 IPCC Special Report stated that
Antarctica likely has cumulatively lost ice mass since widespread measurements began in 1992,
with an increase in ice loss occurring around 2006.60 Specifical y, according to the 2019 IPCC
Special Report, it is extremely likely that the 2012-2016 losses of ice mass in Antarctica were
greater than those from 2002 to 2011 and likely were greater than those from 1992 to 2001. The
IPCC Special Report characterized the contribution of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet to ice loss as
follows: “Antarctic ice loss is dominated by acceleration, retreat and rapid thinning of major West
Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) outlet glaciers (very high confidence), driven by melting of ice
shelves by warm ocean waters (high confidence).”61
Recent studies support that ice mass is largely decreasing in Western Antarctica and remaining
steady or gaining in Eastern Antarctica, contributing to an aggregate loss of ice mass across the
continent.62 For example, using the component method,63 researchers concluded that, between
1979 and 2017, the Antarctic Ice Sheet lost mass at an increasing rate overal , with most of the
accelerated loss in West Antarctic.64
Ice mass loss in Western Antarctica is due, in part, to glacial retreat in the region.65 In this region,
ice mass loss is occurring in the Amundsen Sea Embayment (Figure 2), which includes glaciers
such as the Pine Island and Thwaites Glaciers. Recent estimates indicate the Thwaites is losing
around 50 bil ion tons of ice per year.66 The International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration (ITGC),
using NASA data, calculated that melting ice from this glacier alone is responsible for
approximately 4% of annual global sea-level rise. The ITGC and others note the potential for a
collapsing Thwaites to contribute significantly to global sea-level rise.67
The causes behind ice mass loss in Western Antarctica may be varied. Two studies mapped
subglacial meltwater channels beneath the Thwaites Glacier and indicated these channels offer
pathways for warm seawater to travel beneath the ice sheet and hasten melting.68 The IPCC

60 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “ Polar Regions,” p. 206.
61 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “ Polar Regions,” p. 206.
62 Susheel Adusumilli et al., “Interannual Variations in Meltwater Input to the Southern Ocean from Antarctic Ice
Shelves,” Nature Geoscience, vol. 13 (September 2020), pp. 616-620; and Ben Smith et al., “Pervasive Ice Sheet Mass
Loss Reflects Competing Ocean and Atmospheric Processes,” Science, vol. 368, no. 6496 (April 30, 2020), pp. 1239-
1242. Hereinafter, Smith et al., “ Pervasive Ice Sheet Mass Loss.”
63 T he component method compares accumulated snowfall in the interior of Antarctica with ice discharging at the
grounding line (where the ice meets the ocean and detaches) . See Eric Rignot, “ Four Decades of Antarctic Ice Sheet
Mass Balance from 1979–2017,” Proceedings of the National Academ y of Sciences, vol. 116, no. 4 (January 22, 2019),
pp. 1095-1103. Hereinafter, Rignot, “ Four Decades of Antarctic Ice.”
64 Rignot, “Four Decades of Antarctic Ice.”
65 Glacial retreat is when the terminus end of a glacier recedes or retreats due to ice melting or ablating more quickly
than new glacial ice forming.
66 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “ Polar Regions,” p. 237; International Thwaites Glacier
Collaboration, “T hwaites Glacier Facts,” June 2020, at https://thwaitesglacier.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/
T hwaitesGlacierFactsSheetJune2020_1.pdf.
67 International T hwaites Glacier Collaboration, “T hwaites Glacier Facts,” June 2020, at https://thwaitesglacier.org/
sites/default/files/2020-09/T hwaitesGlacierFactsSheetJune2020_1.pdf; Jeff T ollefson, “ First Look Under Imperiled
Antarctic Glacier Finds Warm Water Coming from all Directions,” Nature, vol. 578, (February 20, 2020), p. 500.
68 Kelly A. Hogan et al., “Revealing the Former Bed of T hwaites Glacier Using Sea-Floor Bathymetry: Implications for
Warm-Water Routing and Controls on Ice Flow and Buttressing,” The Cryosphere, vol. 14 (September 9, 2020), pp.
2883-2908; T om A. Jordan et al., “ New Gravity-Derived Bathymetry for the Thwaites, Crosson, and Dotson Ice
Congressional Research Service
11

link to page 16 Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Special Report also noted that recent Antarctic ice loss is being driven by sub-ice oceanic melting
of ice shelves.69 Scientists report that higher surface temperatures, changes in ocean heat content
linked to atmospheric conditions in the Southern Hemisphere, and potential volcanic activity
under glaciers in Antarctica can cause ice shelves to shrink and, in some cases, calve into the
ocean.70 Additionally, recent research indicates that structural weakening—such as open crevasses
and fractures—of the Pine Island and Thwaites Glaciers may play a role in accelerating instability
and eventual ice loss.71
Projections of future ice-sheet melting in Antarctica beyond 2100—including the potential for
irreversible ice loss—carry uncertainty. (See Figure 2 below.) The IPCC Special Report stated,
“Evolution of the AIS [Antarctic Ice Sheet] beyond the end of the 21st century is characterized by
deep uncertainty as ice sheet models lack realistic representations of some of the underlying
physical processes”;72 the report also noted that “partitioning between natural and human drivers
of atmospheric and ocean circulation changes remains very uncertain.”73 Some scientists contend
that more bathymetric data around Antarctica would help them to understand the formation of ice
shelves and model changes in the ice sheet over time.74 Others note that better estimates of
Antarctica’s past contributions to sea-level rise from portions of its ice sheet, as wel as more
accurate models of ice-shelf and ocean interactions and the evolution of these interactions over
time, would lower the uncertainty of projections of future ice-melting rates in Antarctica.75 One
study examined the potential “tipping points,” or moments when ice losses become irreversible;
its researchers concluded that “the Antarctic Ice Sheet exhibits a multitude of temperature
thresholds beyond which ice loss is irreversible.” 76 Another study highlighted the uncertainties
surrounding predicting the location and timing of such tipping points but noted that certain parts
of the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet may experience irreversible ice loss as a result of a warming
climate.77 The IPCC Special Report emphasized the potential for irreversible ice loss in the future
but noted that observational data is lacking to support this claim. Specifical y, the IPCC stated,
There is limited evidence and high agreement that recent Antarctic Ice Sheet (AIS) mass
losses could be irreversible over decades to millennia. Rapid mass loss due to glacier flow
acceleration in the Amundsen Sea Embayment (ASE) of West Antarctica and in Wilkes
Land, East Antarctica, may indicate the beginning of Marine Ice Sheet Instability (MISI),

Shelves Revealing T wo Ice Shelf Populations,” The Cryosphere, vol. 14 (September 9, 2020), pp. 2869-2882.
69 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “Sea Level Rise,” p. 346.
70 David M. Holland, Keith W. Nicholls, and Aurora Basinski, “T he Southern Ocean and Its Interaction with the
Antarctic Ice Sheet,” Science, vol. 367, no. 6484 (March 20, 2020), pp. 1326 -1330; Johannes J. Furst et al., “T he Safety
Band of Antarctic Ice Shelves,” Nature Climate Change, vol. 6 (2016), pp. 479-482; and Brice Loose et al., “Evidence
of an Active Volcanic Heat Source Beneath the Pine Island Glacier,” Nature Communications, vol. 9 (2018); Mattis
Auger et al., “Southern Ocean In-situ T emperature T rends over 25 Years Emerge from Interannual Variability,” Nature
Com m unications, vol. 12, no. 514, (January, 21, 2021), pp. 1 -9.
71 Lhermitte et al., “Damage Accelerates Ice Shelf Instability and Mass Loss in Amundsen Sea Embayment,”
Proceedings of the National Academ ies of Sciences, vol. 117, no. 40, (October 6, 2020), pp. 24735 -24741.
72 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “Sea Level Rise,” p. 324.
73 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Regions,” p. 240.
74 Bathymetric data is information about the depths and shapes of underwater terrain. T aryn L. Noble et al., “Antarctica
in a Changing Climate,” Editors’ Vox (blog), EOS, November 12, 2020, at https://eos.org/editors-vox/antarctica-in-a-
changing-climate. Hereinafter, Noble, “ Antarctica Climate.”
75 Noble, “Antarctica Climate.”
76 Garbe, “Antarctic Ice Sheet.”
77 Frank Pattyn and Mathieu Morlighem, “T he Uncertain Future of the Antarctic Ice Sheet,” Science, vol. 367, no.
6484, (March 20, 2020), pp. 1331-1335, at https://science.sciencemag.org/content/367/6484/1331.
Congressional Research Service
12

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

but observational data are not yet sufficient to determine whether these changes mark the
beginning of irreversible retreat. 78
Figure 2. Ice Mass Changes in Antarctica, 2003-2019

Source: Ben Smith et al., “Pervasive Ice Sheet Mass Loss Reflects Competing Ocean and Atmospheric
Processes,” Science, vol. 368, no. 6496 (April 30, 2020), pp. 1239-1242. (Used with permission.)
Notes: Note the higher levels of change in the Amundsen Sea (AS) and the Bel ingshausen Sea (BS), both in
Western Antarctica.
Melting Ice and Sea-Level Rise
Melting ice from glaciers and ice sheets can contribute directly to global sea-level rise if the
melting ice runs off land surfaces. 79 Ice shelves in Antarctica play a role in ice sheet dynamics.
They buttress the outflow of melted grounded ice upstream and when they calve or disintegrate,
they al ow grounded ice and shelf ice to flow faster into the ocean. Grounded ice flowing into the
ocean contributes to sea-level rise.80 (Note that floating ice shelves are already in the water and do

78 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Regions,” p. 206.
79 For more information on sea-level rise, see CRS Report R44632, Sea-Level Rise and U.S. Coasts: Science and Policy
Considerations, by Peter Folger and Nicole T . Carter. Melting sea ice does not contribute directly to sea-level rise.
80 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “ Sea Level Rise,” p. 331.
Congressional Research Service
13

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

not directly contribute to sea-level rise.) Ice shelves lose mass through calving and melting from
below, especial y when they are in contact with warmer ocean water.
The volume of ice contained within the Antarctic Ice Sheet is substantial; melting of portions of
the ice sheet could contribute substantial y to global sea-level rise over the centuries. Thus, the
fate of this ice mass makes it a concern to countries that would be affected by sea-level rise.81
(See textbox on Potential National Security Implications of Sea-Level Rise.) The IPCC Special
Report stated,
Global mean sea level (GMSL) is rising, with acceleration in recent decades due to
increasing rates of ice los s from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets (very high
confidence), as well as continued glacier mass loss and ocean thermal expansion. Increases
in tropical cyclone winds and rainfall, and increases in extreme waves, combined with
relative sea level rise, exacerbate extreme sea level events and coastal hazards (high
confidence).82
According to the 2019 IPCC Special Report, sea levels have risen at a rate of approximately 1-2
mil imeters per year (mm/yr) in most regions over the past century.83 However, rates of
approximately 3-4 mm/yr were experienced recently (2006-2015). By the end of the century,
these rates are projected to increase to 4-9 mm/yr under low-emissions scenarios (RCP2.6) and
10-20 mm/yr under high-emissions scenarios (RCP8.5).84 According to the 2019 IPCC Special
Report, uncertainty in climate change-driven future sea-level rise up to 2050 is relatively smal ;
however, beyond 2050, uncertainty in sea-level rise increases substantial y.85
Net loss of ice mass in Antarctica is contributing to global mean sea-level rise. From 1993 to
2015, the Antarctic Ice Sheet and peripheral glaciers contributed approximately 9% to the
estimated average rate of annual sea-level rise.86 From 2006 to 2015, however, the Antarctic Ice
Sheet and peripheral glaciers contributed approximately 12% to the estimated average rate of
annual sea-level rise, indicating an average annual increase in Antarctica’s contribution to sea-
level-rise equivalent.87 The greatest present-day contribution to sea-level rise from Antarctica
comes from grounded ice mass loss and the thinning of floating ice shelves, both in Western
Antarctica; both sources al ow more ice to flow from the interior to the ocean.88

81 Rignot, “Four Decades of Antarctic Ice.”
82 H.-O. Pörtner et al., “Summary for Policymakers,” in IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a
Changing Clim ate, IPCC, 2019, p. 10 Hereinafter, Pörtner et al., IPCC Special Report, “ Summary.”
83 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “ Sea Level Rise,” p. 327.
84 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “ Sea Level Rise,” p. 327. RCP 2.6 and RCP 8.5 are greenhouse-
gas-emission scenarios used by the IPCC to calculate projections. According to the IPCC, “ RCP2.6 represents a low
greenhouse gas emissions, high mitigation future, that in CMIP5 simulations gives a two in three chance of limiting
global warming to below 2ºC by 2100. By contrast, RCP8.5 is a high greenhouse gas emissions scenario in the absence
of policies to combat climate change, leading to continued and sustained growt h in atmospheric greenhouse gas
concentrations.” T aken from Pörtner et al., IPCC Special Report, “Summary,” Box SPM.1.
85 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “ Sea Level Rise,” p. 327.
86 T he percentage is derived from the observed global mean sea level from tidal gauges and altimetry provided in T able
4.1 in Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “Sea Level Rise,” p. 336.
87 T he percentage is derived from the observed global mean sea level from tidal gauges and altimetry provided in T able
4.1 in Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “Sea Level Rise,” p. 336.
88 Smith et al., “Pervasive Ice Sheet Mass Loss.”
Congressional Research Service
14

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

The Greenland ice sheet currently contributes more to sea-level rise than the Antarctic Ice Sheet.
Some scientists assert that the Antarctic Ice Sheet could contribute more to global sea-level rise
by the end of century, due to the rate of projected ice mass loss discussed above.89
Some scientists have attempted to assess the potential future contribution to global sea-level rise
from melting ice in Antarctica. Antarctica’s contribution to global sea-level rise leading to 2100
and beyond is one of the more significant uncertainties in projections of sea-level rise under
various climate change scenarios, in part due to uncertainties related to the timing and effects of
ice sheet instability in Antarctica.90 According to scientists, uncertainty related to ice sheet
instability arises from limited observations; inadequate model representation of ice sheet
processes; and a limited understanding of the interactions between the atmosphere, ocean, and ice
sheets.91 Although the 2019 IPCC Special Report used median estimates of Antarctica’s
contribution of 0.04 meters and 0.12 meters of sea-level rise (from a baseline of 1986 to 2005
levels) in 2100 as likely for low-emissions (RCP2.6) and high-emissions scenarios (RCP8.5),
respectively,92 an overview of different studies shows a wide variation for median estimates for
Antarctica’s contribution during this and the next century.93
Other studies refer to the geological record to estimate the potential for Antarctica to contribute to
sea-level rise. For example, one study reports that ice sheets in Eastern Antarctica collapsed
400,000 years ago, when carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were 300 parts per mil ion
(ppm).94 Current levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are near 410 ppm, which leads some
scientists to project greater levels of sea-level rise from ice melting in Antarctica than the collapse
400,000 years ago.95
Potential National Security Implications of Sea-Level Rise
Measuring and projecting the contribution to global sea-level rise from regions such as Antarctica is key to
understanding how sea-level rise may affect coastal societies and raise national security concerns. Sea-level rise
causes increased flooding (i.e., overal and due to storm events), coastal erosion for erodible coastlines, and
increased salinity of groundwater resources in low-lying coastal areas. Approximately 600 mil ion people live in
coastal areas that are less than 10 meters above sea level, leading some scientists to claim that any level of sea-
level rise could displace mil ions of people. Some policymakers assert that these effects could displace
communities, alter infrastructure (e.g., ports), and be costly. These warnings are tempered by some studies that
question whether sea-level rise would cause large-scale migrations and affect infrastructure in many coastal areas.

89 Pörtner et al., IPCC Special Report, “Summary,” B.1.2 and B.3.1.
90 Pörtner et al., IPCC Special Report, “Summary,” B.3.1 and Jonathan L. Bamber et al., “Ice Sheet Contributions to
Future Sea-Level Rise from Structured Expert Judgement,” Proceedings of the National Academ y of Sciences, vol. 116,
no. 23 (2019), pp. 11195-11200.
91 Pörtner et al., IPCC Special Report, “Summary,” A.3.3.
92 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “Sea Level Rise,” T able 4.4, p. 352. Estimated projections and
their variability are based on expert elicitation.
93 Oppenheimer et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 4, “Sea Level Rise,” T able 4.3, p. 351. Note that median or other
estimates depend in part on the emissions and climate scenarios assumed; the RCPs in particular are not predictions or
projections.
94 Over long time scales, including during the current ice age, factors in addition to CO2 concentrations in the
atmosphere have at various time dominated influences on the climate system. See, for example, Christopher J.
Campisano, “Milankovitch Cycles, Paleoclimatic Change, and Hominin Evolution | Learn Science at Scitable,” Nature
Education, 2012, at https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/milankovitch-cycles-paleoclimatic-change-
and-hominin-evolution-68244581/.
95 T . Blackburn et al., “Ice Retreat in Wilkes Basin of East Antarctica During a Warm Interglacial,” Nature, vol. 583
(July 22, 2020), pp. 554-559; and Douglas Fox, “ Biggest Ice Sheet on Earth More Vulnerable to Melting T han
T hought,” National Geographic, July 22, 2020, at https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/07/east-antarctic-
ice-sheet -more-vulnerable-to-melting-than-thought/.
Congressional Research Service
15

link to page 20 Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Some policymakers argue that some coastal communities may adapt to sea-level rise rather than migrate
elsewhere.
Potential sea-level rise effects could exacerbate other factors that could lead to various national security concerns.
For example, the 2012 Department of Homeland Security Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap notes that “in U.S.
coastal regions, rising sea levels, higher storm surge, and increased erosion could damage or destroy critical
infrastructure,” and the 2015 National Security Strategy states that “increased sea levels and storm surges threaten
coastal regions, infrastructure, and property.” Other government reports and studies have echoed these findings.
For example, some experts contend the effects of sea-level rise are diverse and could range from altering the
territorial integrity of nations to the exacerbating the effects of disasters for economies, cultures, and societies.
Further, reports state that critical infrastructure, major military instal ations, and hurricane evacuation routes are
increasingly vulnerable to impacts, such as higher sea levels, storm surges, and flooding exacerbated by climate
change.
These effects are relevant for the United States and for other countries in the world. In his statement for the
record before the Senate Select Committee on Intel igence in January 2019, President Trump’s Director of
National Intel igence, Daniel Coats, pointed out the fol owing: “Extreme weather events, many worsened by
accelerating sea level rise, wil particularly affect urban coastal areas in South Asia, Southeast Asia, and the
Western Hemisphere. Damage to communication, energy, and transportation infrastructure could affect low-lying
military bases, inflict economic costs, and cause human displacement and loss of life.”
Sources: Mathew E. Hauer et al., “Sea-Level Rise and Human Migration,” Nature Reviews: Earth and
Environment, vol. 1 (December 9, 2019), pp. 28-39; Dominic Kniveton, “Sea-Level Rise Impacts: Questioning
Inevitable Migration,” Nature Climate Change, vol. 7 (2017), pp. 548-549; “Findings from Select Federal
Reports: The National Security Implications of a Changing Climate,” White House, May 2015; Daniel Coats,
Director of National Intel igence, in U.S. Congress, Senate Select Committee on Intel igence, Worldwide
Threat Assessment of the U.S, Intel igence Community, statement for the record, January 29, 2019; Rob Jordan,
“Bracing for Sea Level Rise to Boost National Security,” Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford
University, June 26, 2018.
Sea Ice Extent
Sea ice extent is one of several ice-related metrics used to track climate change in polar regions.
When sea ice melts, it does not add to the mass of ocean water and therefore does not contribute
directly to sea-level rise. Scientists have measured sea ice extent in Antarctica using satel ites
since the 1970s (a period referred to as the satellite era). The 2019 IPCC Special Report
concluded that “[i]t is very likely that Antarctic sea ice cover exhibits no significant trend over the
period of satel ite observations (1979–2018).”96
For most of the satel ite era, the data show high year-to-year variability in the lowest daily sea ice
extent of the year; scientists attribute this variability to a variety of potential drivers.97 (See
Figure 3.) However, since 2010, the variability has increased, with record high sea ice extent in
2012, 2013, and 2014 and record low sea ice extent in 2017 and 2018.98 The 2020 minimum
extent was below the 1981-2010 climatological average but above the record low recorded in
2017.99 These data are based on the relatively short duration of satel ite data available
(approximately 40 years); consequently, the longer-term trends in sea ice extent are less certain.

96 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “ Polar Regions,” pp. 205-206.
97 Michon Scott, “Understanding Climate: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent,” NOAA, April 28, 2020, at
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/understanding-climate-antarctic-sea-ice-extent.
Hereinafter, Scott, “Antarctic Sea Ice Extent.”
98 Scott, “Antarctic Sea Ice Extent.”
99 Scott, “Antarctic Sea Ice Extent.”
Congressional Research Service
16

link to page 21
Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Figure 3. Antarctica’s Lowest Daily Sea Ice Extent of the Year (1979-2020)

Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), “Understanding Climate: Antarctic Sea Ice
Extent,” April 28, 2020, at https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/understanding-climate-
antarctic-sea-ice-extent.
Notes: Graph depicts each year’s minimum sea ice extent since the start of the satel ite record (1979). Extent is
the total area where the ice concentration is 15% or higher. Data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center.
Biodiversity
Antarctica is experiencing habitat alteration, invasive species, pollution, and, according to some
stakeholders, natural resources exploitation.100 One study reports that although most of Antarctica
can be considered wilderness (99.6%-100%),101 pristine areas free from human influence
comprise less than 32% of the continent.102 Human- and climate-driven factors affect biodiversity
and fisheries in the Antarctic region. For example, more than half of the 18 species of penguins
global y are in decline, including four species in the subantarctic region.103 King penguin
populations are increasing in Antarctica, and Royal and Gentoo penguin species are stable.104 (See
Figure 4 for the projected status of emperor penguin colonies and textbox on Emperor penguins
for more discussion.)

100 Hannah S. Wauchope, Justine D. Shaw, and Aleks T erauds, “A Snap shot of Biodiversity Protection in Antarctica,”
Nature Com m unications, vol. 10, no. 946 (2019), p. 946. Hereinafter, Wauchope et al., “ Biodiversity Protection in
Antarctica.”
101 T his study used four definitions of wilderness to determine this figure. In gen eral, the figure represents the
percentage of the continent that has retained its intact, pristine natural ecosystems.
102 Rachel I. Leihy et al., “Antarctica’s Wilderness Fails to Capture Continent’s Biodiversity,” Nature, vol. 583 (July
15, 2020), pp. 567-571.
103 P. D. Boersma et al., “Applying Science to Pressing Conservation Needs for Penguins,” Conservation Biology, vol.
34, no. 1 (2019), pp. 103-112. Hereinafter, Boersma, “ Applying Science for Penguins.”
104 Boersma, “Applying Science for Penguins.”
Congressional Research Service
17

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Figure 4. Location of Current Emperor Penguin Colonies in Antarctica and Their
Projected Vulnerability in 2100

Source: Peter T. Fretwel and Philip N. Thrathan, “Discovery of New Colonies by Sentinel2 Reveals Good and
Bad News for Emperor Penguins,” Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation, August 4, 2020, using data from
Stéphanie Jenouvrier et al., “The Paris Agreement Objectives Wil Likely Halt Future Declines of Emperor
Penguins,” Global Change Biology, vol. 26, no. 3 (November 7, 2019), pp. 1170-1184.
Emperor Penguins (Aptenodytes forsteri)
Emperor penguins spend their entire lives in the Antarctic and are adapted to cold temperatures. They depend on
stable, landfast sea ice as breeding habitat and for colonies. They general y feed upon fish, kril , and cephalopods.
Emperor penguins reside and seek their prey in polynyas (areas of open water or persistently loose sea ice). The
penguins travel annual y to the same breeding sites, which might take weeks to reach, and stay at these sites
during their eggs’ incubation periods, huddled to protect themselves from cold temperatures and winds.
The colonies’ need for stable ice makes them vulnerable to altered wind regimes, rising temperatures, and
reduced sea ice extent and persistence, according to several studies. Many studies project a large number of
emperor penguin colonies wil be gone by the next century, due to rising temperatures and ice loss. Some
scientists estimate that with projected increases in temperature, al Antarctic colonies could decrease in size; for
example, Stéphanie Jenouvrier and coauthors estimate 43 of the 54 existing colonies (80%) potential y decreasing
by more than 90% by 2100.
Some scientists contend that lowering the effects of ice loss and rising temperatures can reduce threats to
emperor penguins. Until this reduction occurs, however, some stakeholders advise protections for penguins at
breeding sites and foraging locations. Further, some scientists recommend adding emperor penguins to a Special y
Protected Species list in the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, one of the agreements
that comprises the Antarctic Treaty System.
Sources: Peter T. Fretwel and Philip N. Thrathan, “Discovery of New Colonies by Sentinel2 Reveals Good
and Bad News for Emperor Penguins,” Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation, August 4, 2020; Stéphanie
Jenouvrier et al., “The Paris Agreement Objectives Wil Likely Halt Future Declines of Emperor Penguins,”
Global Change Biology, vol. 26, no. 3 (November 7, 2019), pp. 1170-1184; Philip N. Trathan et al., “The
Emperor Penguin: Vulnerable to Projected Rates of Warming and Sea Ice Loss,” Biological Conservation, vol.
241 (January 2020).
Congressional Research Service
18

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty
The ATS is composed of the Antarctic Treaty and several associated agreements. One of these
agreements, the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (entered into force
in 1998), addresses Antarctica’s environment and biodiversity, among other issues.105 The
protocol designated Antarctica as a “natural reserve devoted to peace and science” and required
the parties to “commit themselves to the comprehensive protection of the Antarctic environment
and dependent and associated ecosystems.”106
The Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty has six annexes. Annexes I-IV
entered into force with the protocol, Annex V entered into force in 2002, and Annex VI has been
adopted and is awaiting approval by the consultative parties before entering into force.107 Annex I
includes a requirement to conduct an environmental impact assessment before implementing an
activity to assess the activity’s impact to the environment. Annex II includes prohibitions on the
intentional introduction of non-native species and regulations that address the disturbance of
native species and ecosystems.108 Annex II also contains an Appendix on Special y Protected
Species. Species on this list are protected, with limited exceptions, compared with other species.
A permit to kil or harm these species can be provided only if the action is for a scientifical y
compel ing purpose and wil not jeopardize the survival or recovery of that species or local
population. The Ross seal and the fur seal (al species of the genus Arctocephalus) currently are
the only species on this list. Annex III creates the principle that waste generation and disposal
should be minimized on Antarctica and establishes a framework for cleaning waste sites. Annex
IV prohibits the discharge of pollution, plastics, and other garbage from ships in the sea.109
Annex V to the Protocol provides for Antarctic Special y Protected Areas, which are designated to
protect outstanding environmental, scientific, historic, aesthetic, or wilderness values; scientific
research; or a combination of both.110 Some scientists argue that actions to curb human impacts
on biodiversity have been limited.111 Although some scientists view the establishment of
protected areas as promising, others warn that these areas wil not be able to stem the decline of
biodiversity.112
In the United States, the Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C.
§§2401-2413; P.L. 104-227) codified in U.S. law the environmental standards set forth by the
protocol.113

105 Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, “T he Antarctic T reaty System,” at https://www.scar.org/policy/
antarctic-treaty-system/.
106 Australian Antarctic Program, “Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic T reaty (T he Madrid
Protocol),” at https://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/law-and-treaty/the-madrid-protocol/.
107 Secretariat of the Antarctic T reaty at https://www.ats.aq/e/protocol.html.
108 “Annex II to the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty: Conservation of Antarctic Fauna and
Flora,” at https://documents.ats.aq/cephandbook/Annex_II_e.pdf.
109 A repository of the Annexes can be found at https://www.ats.aq/e/key-documents.html.
110 “Annex V to the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic T reaty: Area Protection and Management,”
at https://documents.ats.aq/cephandbook/Annex_V_e.pdf.
111 Wauchope et al., “ Biodiversity Protection in Antarctica,” 2019.
112 Justine D. Shaw et al., “Antarctica’s Protected Areas Are Inadequate, Unrepresentative, and at Risk,” PLOS
Biology, vol. 12, no. 6 (June 17, 2014).
113 T his act amended P.L. 95-541 to include provisions from the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic
T reaty and Annexes I-V. Further, it required environmental impact assessments for all activities conducted by federal
agencies (16 U.S.C. §2403a).
Congressional Research Service
19

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Fisheries
Some stakeholders and scientists are concerned about a number of factors that may diminish fish
populations in the Southern Ocean. These factors include overfishing; climate-induced changes in
oceans and sea ice; and il egal, unregulated, and unreported fishing in the Southern Ocean.114
Further, a lack of data and monitoring would make it difficult to understand trends and quantify
the effects of policies on fisheries. More than 20 countries fish in the Southern Ocean, including
the United States, catching Antarctic kril and silverfish, among other species.
Antarctic Krill
Antarctic kril (Euphausia superba) are a key component of the Antarctic marine ecosystem, because they are food
for hundreds of species, including whales, fish, invertebrates, and birds. Kril also contribute to the biogeochemical
systems in the ocean and the carbon cycle. Kril feed on phytoplankton and excrete pel ets containing carbon and
other nutrients that are consumed by microorganisms. Approximately 70% of the global kril population resides in
and around Antarctica. Kril live in swarms and have lifespans up to 10 years. They are dependent on sea ice,
because they use it to shelter their larvae. The southwest Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean is the focus of
the Antarctic kril fishery. Antarctic kril accounts for 85% of the total fishery catch by weight in the Southern
Ocean. The kril fishery in this sector has been increasing steadily from 2010 to 2019, according to reports. The
fishery is regulated by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, which sets
catch limits. Some stakeholders are concerned that increased fishing, sea ice loss, and shifting populations of kril
might lead to future declines.
There is debate and uncertainty regarding trends in kril population size in the southwest Atlantic sector over the
last 50 years. Some studies report a decline in kril abundance after analyzing catch data, whereas other studies
have reanalyzed the data and reported no conclusive evidence for a decline in kril . Some scientists note the global
kril population is known for its boom and bust cycles, making it difficult to quantify population trends. Some
studies project the distribution of kril is expected to shift southward, due to changes in the optimum areas for
kril growth and recruitment. Populations are expected to shift away from areas with warming waters and move
southward, closer to the Antarctic land mass, for greater sea ice coverage. According to some scientists, the
highest potential loss of kril might be in areas where they are most consumed by other marine life and fished.
Efforts to conserve kril in addition to catch limits include the establishment Marine Protected Areas (MPAs),
which could lead to restricted fishing zones for kril . Some countries favor MPAs because they restrict fishing and
other activities to promote conservation; other countries assert MPAs are not necessary.
Sources: M. Meredith et al., “Polar Regions” in IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing
Climate, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2019, p. 231; Erik Stokstad, “Is the Fishing
Industry Leaving Enough Food for Antarctica’s Top Predators?,” Science Magazine, January 15, 2019; Carolyn
J. Hogg et al., “Protect the Antarctic Peninsula—Before It’s Too Late,” Nature, vol. 586, no. 7830 (October
22, 2020), pp. 496-499; Martin James Cox et al., “No Evidence for a Decline in the Density of Antarctic Kril
Euphausia superba Dana, 1850, in the Southwest Atlantic Sector Between 1976 and 2016,” Journal of
Crustacean Biology, vol. 39, no. 3 (2019), pp. 323-327; and Simeon L. Hil et al., “Evidence for a Decline in the
Population Density of Antarctic Kril Euphausia superba Dana, 1850 Stil Stands. A Comment on Cox et al.,”
Journal of Crustacean Biology, vol. 39, no. 3 (2019), pp. 316-322.
Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources
Another associated agreement that is part of the ATS, the Convention on the Conservation of
Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), governs fishing in the Antarctic region. The
agreement was signed by several countries, including the United States, in 1980 and entered into
force in 1982. The CCAMLR was created in response to commercial interest in Antarctic kril
resources and overexploitation of other marine resources in the Southern Ocean.115 It applies to

114 Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition, “Southern Ocean Fisheries,” press release, 2020, at https://www.asoc.org/
advocacy/wildlife-conservation/southern-ocean-fisheries.
115 Erik Stokstad, “Is the Fishing Industry Leaving Enough Food for Antarctica’s T op Predators?,” Science Magazine,
Congressional Research Service
20

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

al Antarctic populations of finfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and sea birds found south of the
Antarctic Convergence.116
The CCAMLR set limits on fishing that some countries have chal enged. Some stakeholders
support fishing limits due to concerns about overfishing. These stakeholders suggest that better-
designed marine reserves, increased planning for climate change in decision rules, and better
research and monitoring under the CCAMLR are needed to improve the convention’s
effectiveness.117 In response to these concerns, the CCAMLR proposed a series of Marine
Protected Areas (MPAs) around Antarctica with the purpose of preserving the region’s marine
biodiversity and creating areas for overfished species (including kril ) to recover. To date, two
MPAs have been implemented, one in the South Orkney Islands in 2009 and one in the Ross Sea
in 2016.118 The Ross Sea MPA is one of the world’s largest international MPAs, with an area of
193,000 square miles.119 Some countries, such as China and Russia, oppose the expansion of
MPAs in the Southern Ocean and greater restrictions on fisheries. These countries contend there
should be specific, narrow criteria for closing fishing areas and argue that no-fishing zones are
contrary to the CCAMLR.120
Pollution
Evidence of pollution is prevalent in parts of Antarctica with tourism and scientific activities.
Pollution can have long-term, localized effects on marine organisms and wildlife. For example,
studies have reported microplastic pollution in Antarctic surface waters and sediments and, more
recently, in Antarctic sea ice.121 Pollution also comes from shipping vessels due to accidents, oil
spil s, and waste discharges. In Antarctic waters, ships are prohibited from discharging noxious
liquid substances and other chemicals that might harm the marine environment, oil, garbage, and
other substances into the sea under Annex IV to the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the
Antarctic Treaty.
In addition, some stakeholders are concerned about tourism and its environmental effects.
Tourism in the Antarctic is conducted in accordance with the Protocol on Environmental
Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, which has environmental regulations, a process for establishing
and monitoring protected areas, and regulations on disposing waste.122 A waste-management plan
is required for each country, and waste is to be minimized and returned to the country of those

January 15, 2019.
116 T he area covered by the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources consists of all
waters bounded by the Antarctic Continent to the south and to the north by a line starting at latitude S 50°, longitude W
50°. See Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, “ Con vention Area: Statistical Areas,”
at https://www.ccamlr.org/en/system/files/CCAMLR-Convention-Area-Map.pdf.
117 PEW Charitable T rusts, The Need for a Network of Marine Protected Areas in the Southern Ocean, issue brief,
October 7, 2020, at https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2020/10/the-need-for-a-network-
of-marine-protected-areas-in-the-southern-ocean.
118 NOAA Fisheries, “Marine Protected Area in Antarctica’s Ross Sea,” February 26, 2018, at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/international-affairs/marine-protected-area-antarcticas-ross-sea.
119 See Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources at http://www.ccamlr.org.
120 Feiger and Wilson, “ Countries T aking Advantage.”
121 Catherine L. Waller et al., “Microplastics in the Antarctic Marine System: An Emerging Area of Research,” Science
of the Total Environm ent, vol. 598 (November 15, 2017), pp. 220 -227; Anna Kelly et al., “ Microplastic Contamination
in East Antarctic Sea Ice,” Marine Pollution Bulletin, vol. 154 (May 2020).
122 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Regions,” p. 264.
Congressional Research Service
21

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

generating the waste to the maximum extent possible.123 The protocol also authorizes observers to
inspect stations and report on any environmental issues;124 these inspections are to be done in
accordance with inspections carried out under Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty.
Mineral Resources
Although there are no known commercial quantities of minerals, oil, or petroleum in Antarctica,
some scientists believe undocumented commercial quantities might exist on the continent.125
Reporting the resource potential of Antarctica is chal enging, due to the thick layer of ice
covering the land. The Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty bans mineral
extraction in and around Antarctica. Article VII of protocol states, “Any activity relating to
mineral resources, other than scientific research, shal be prohibited.” Article VII also states that
after the protocol’s 50-year term, the parties can convene to revisit the ban on mineral extraction.
According to Article VII, mineral extraction could occur if there were a binding legal regime in
place that included an agreed means for determining under which conditions extraction activities
would be acceptable.
Some observers believe pressure wil build from some countries for increased resource
exploitation in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean. According to one source, “growing awareness
of the impacts of climate change and suspicions that states are interested in the resource potential
of the continent mean that scientific activities and political motives for being involved in
Antarctic research are increasingly coming under global scrutiny.”126 In contrast to this
perspective, no known extraction activities are taking place in Antarctica, although some
stakeholders assert that various scientific activities conducted by China and Russia may lay the
groundwork for future mineral extraction.127
Issues for Congress
Congress may consider its role in seeking to protect or promote U.S. strategic, economic,
environmental, and scientific interests in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean.
Geopolitical Considerations
The Antarctic Treaty binds countries together in forming policies that govern the continent. Some
have questioned how resilient the treaty wil be to changes initiated by parties.128 Congress may
examine the treaty’s resiliency to change and consider for what purposes the treaty could be
chal enged in the future. For example, some analysts contend that China is seeking new flexibility
in implementation of the treaty.129 These observers al ege that several incidents over the last few

123 T he Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, Annex III, Waste Disposal and Waste
Management.
124 Article 14 of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic T reaty.
125 William Westermeyer et al., Polar Prospects: A Minerals Treaty for Antarctica, Office of T echnology Assessment,
OT A-0-428, September 1989, p. 94.
126 Klaus Dodds and Mark Nuttall, The Scramble for the Poles: Geopolitics of the Arctic and Antarctica (Malden:
Polity Publishers, 2016). Hereinafter, Dodds and Nuttall, Scram ble for the Poles.
127 Dodds and Nuttall, Scramble for the Poles.
128 If a binding legal agreement among parties on mineral exploitation is reached as prescribed under Article 25.5 of the
Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, miner al extraction potentially could proceed.
129 Ralph Espach and Nilanthi Samaranayake, “Antarctica Is the New Arctic: Security and Strategy in the Southern
Congressional Research Service
22

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

years support this view: China built its latest research base on Antarctica without completing a
required environmental impact assessment; China and Russia cooperated to delay the
implementation of new MPAs that would protect fisheries; and China proposed the creation of a
“Chinese management district” of approximately 20,000 square kilometers where foreigners were
to be restricted (the proposal was rejected).130 Congress might consider whether this reported
progression of actions could be aimed at supporting Chinese territorial claims in Antarctica.
China has increased its presence in Antarctica in other ways. For example, China has increased
kril fishing and expanded tourism in the region, and it is the only country to build research
stations on the continent since 2000.131 China currently has four research stations in Antarctica,
with plans for a fifth station. Some stakeholders are concerned about China’s increased presence
and its implications for the ATS and for other nations. Congress might consider how expanding
Chinese activities and presence in Antarctica could affect the expectations, strategies, and policies
of countries with existing territorial claims in the region such as Australia, the United Kingdom,
Argentina, and Chile. Further, Congress might consider how China could seek to alter the ATS to
benefit its activities and presence in Antarctica.
Some stakeholders contend that receding sea ice levels wil make Antarctica more accessible for
longer periods of time and wil provide an incentive for exploiting fisheries and other natural
resources (e.g., oil and gas). Greater accessibility could increase the need for monitoring and
regulatory enforcement of the Antarctic Treaty.132 The United States, the Netherlands, and South
Korea have complained about the difficulty of carrying out inspections of facilities and proposed
the creation of a database on inspections to improve transparency.133 More than a dozen stations,
including Chinese and Russian ones, have yet to be inspected, according to some reports.134
Congress might consider whether increased monitoring by the United States and other countries
and improved transparency are necessary to adequately inspect facilities and monitor fishing and
scientific activities. Congress also might consider whether expanding the U.S. Antarctic fleet
would facilitate an increase in monitoring and match heightened presence by other countries.
Lastly, some stakeholders note the Antarctic Treaty does not have a mechanism to sanction parties
that violate the treaty; Congress may consider encouraging the Administration to work with other
parties to enhance compliance mechanisms under the treaty and pursue infractions to the treaty
through other international organizations, such as the United Nations.135

Ocean,” CNA InDepth, March 17, 2020. Hereinafter, Espach and Samaranayake, “ Antarctica Is the New Arctic.”
130 Anne Marie Brady, China’s Expanding Antarctic Interests: Implications for Australia , Australian Strategic Policy
Institute, August 2017, pp. 1-24, at https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ad-aspi/2017-08/SR109 Chinas
expanding interests in Antarctica.pdf?LqDGafveA4ogNHB6K08cq86VoEzKQc; Preethi Amaresh, “ China’s Increasing
Foothold in Antarctica,” On Research (fall 2020), pp. 45-49; and Espach and Samaranayake, “ Antarctica Is the New
Arctic.”
131 Giulia Sciorati, China’s Polar Strategy Through the Looking Glass, Istituto Per GLI Studi de Politica
Internazionale, July 2019, at https://www.ispionline.it/it/pubblicazione/chinas-polar-strategy-through-looking-glass-
23525.
132 Clark and Sloman, Securing the Frontier, pp. 4-6.
133 Feiger and Wilson, “ Countries T aking Advantage.”
134 Feiger and Wilson, “ Countries T aking Advantage.” Also see the Inspections Database created by the Secretariat of
the Antarctic T reaty at https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Ats/InspectionsDatabase?lang=e
135 Fishman, “China’s Advance.”
Congressional Research Service
23

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Natural Resource Considerations
Some stakeholders are concerned about the extraction and preservation of natural resources in
Antarctica, even though these issues are addressed in the ATS. Presently, mineral resource
extraction in Antarctica is banned; however, some biological resources are declining, such as
certain fisheries and some habitat. Further, some stakeholders speculate that towing icebergs from
Antarctica to cities in South Africa and the Middle East to address freshwater issues could be
proposed in the future.136 Congress might consider options for U.S. roles in addressing the
balance between protecting natural resources and al owing extractive uses in Antarctica as it
relates to biodiversity, fishing, and minerals.
For example, Congress might consider new or enhanced approaches to improve the conservation
of biodiversity in Antarctica through the ATS. Some scientists assert that the current approaches
to conservation of biodiversity in Antarctica are inadequate, given the threats of climate-driven
changes to the Antarctic environment as wel as human activities on the continent.137 Some
stakeholders propose the creation of an integrated biodiversity strategy and action plan for
Antarctica and the Southern Ocean under the ATS to provide a pathway for conserving
biodiversity. Further, they suggest deploying tools and creating a plan for measuring and
monitoring Antarctic biodiversity.138 Some stakeholders might question the value of this approach
and whether it would garner support from al consultative parties. These stakeholders might
contend that increased protection could hinder the development of new stations.
In addition, Congress may consider issues related to Antarctic fisheries. Some stakeholders
express concern that certain fisheries in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean are overexploited;
they contend the Antarctic Treaty needs additional measures to protect these fisheries.139 Further,
scientists note that changes in climate and sea ice extent can affect fisheries and some contend
that precautionary based ecosystem management140 should be employed to counter these
effects.141 In contrast, some stakeholders contend the treaty overly restricts resource extraction
and should be more lenient for sustainable extraction. For example, these stakeholders assert that
fisheries in the Southern Ocean should have fewer fishing restrictions on species such as kril .142
Congress may consider encouraging the Administration to press other consultative parties to
ratify the creation of MPAs along the coast of Eastern Antarctica and in the Weddel Sea to
improve conservation of marine resources. These MPAs would cover kril fishing grounds,
according to scientists. The CCAMLR attempted to establish these MPAs in 2020; however, they
were not implemented due to Chinese and Russian opposition to restrictions on fishing, among
other resources.143 Many scientists perceive an urgent need to create protected areas before

136 Jeremy Berke, “An Engineering Firm Wants to T ow Ice Bergs T housands of Milles from Antarctica to Quench the
Driest Areas in the World—and It’s Starting in Dubai,” Business Insider, September 8, 2018, at
https://www.businessinsider.com/engineering-firm-tow-icebergs-antarctica-for-water.
137 Steven L. Chown et al., “Antarctica and the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity,” PLOS Biology, vol. 15, no. 3 (March
28, 2017). Hereinafter, Chown et al., “Antarctica and the Strategic Plan.”
138 Chown et al., “Antarctica and the Strategic Plan.”
139 For example, see Elizabeth Grossman, “Scientists Consider Whether Krill Need to be Protected from Human Over -
Hunting,” The World, July 14, 2015.
140 Precautionary based ecosystem management means taking management actions now to avert anticipated ecosystem
issues in the future.
141 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Regions,” pp. 262 and 276.
142 Feiger and Wilson, “Countries T aking Advantage.”
143 Elizabeth Claire Alberts, “No Other Choice: Groups Push to Protect Vast Swaths of Antarctic Seas,” Mongabay,
October 19, 2020, at https://news.mongabay.com/2020/10/no-other-choice-groups-push-to-protect-vast-swaths-of-
Congressional Research Service
24

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

climate change, fishing, and human activities such as tourism and research stations further affect
the region.144
Antarctica may have undocumented commercial mineral resources, including oil, coal, and iron
ore. Congress also may consider whether possible future efforts to increase natural resource
extraction in Antarctica hold the potential for instigating future disagreements and conflicts in the
region. Some stakeholders contend the United States and other countries should consider how to
address portions of the Antarctic Treaty that affect mining if they are debated earlier than 2048,
when several parts of the ATS wil come up for possible renewal or modifications.145 Some
geologists counter this concern by noting that successfully extracting mineral deposits would
require overcoming hazardous conditions and potential y mining through a thick ice sheet.146
Further, transporting products over long stretches on the Southern Ocean might be treacherous
and costly.
Melting Ice and Sea-Level Rise
Several studies report that melting ice in Antarctica is contributing to increases in annual average
rates of global sea-level rise.147 Several scientists, however, highlight the current scientific
uncertainty of future melting rates in Antarctica and question how melting rates and subsequent
sea-level rise wil respond to future anthropogenic climate change.148 The 2019 IPCC Special
Report stated that there is a need to better understand polar glaciers, ice sheets, and their
contributions to sea-level rise; specifical y, longer and better quantifiable data are needed, along
with a better attribution of natural versus anthropogenic drivers of change.149 Scientists and
policymakers also note that reducing scientific uncertainty and more precisely projecting
Antarctica’s contribution to sea-level rise could help society manage risks of sea-level rise.150
Scientific research on Antarctica, both through on-the-ground fieldwork in research stations and
through remote satel ite observations, may contribute to a better scientific understanding of the
region. Improved scientific understanding of Antarctica could have implications for better
understanding of global phenomena, such as global weather, ocean circulation, and the
relationship between ice dynamics and sea-level rise. Congress might consider the level of U.S.
support for research on ice dynamics in Antarctica. Congress also might consider if there is a
sufficient level of scientific collaboration and sharing of scientific findings among countries
doing research in Antarctica. Further, Congress may weigh the usefulness of developing a larger
footprint (e.g., more scientific bases and infrastructure) in Antarctica to facilitate U.S. and
collaborative research.

antarctic-seas/.
144 Carolyn J. Hogg et al., “Protect the Antarctic Peninsula—Before It’s T oo Late,” Nature, vol. 586, no. 7830 (October
22, 2020), pp. 496-499.
145 Espach and Samaranayake, “ Antarctica is the New Arctic.”
146 Australian Antarctic Program, “ Mining in Antarctica,” October 27, 2020, at https://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-
antarctica/geography-and-geology/geology/mining/.
147 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Region s,” p. 276.
148 For example, see Chii-Yun T sai, Chris E. Forest, and David Pollard, “T he Role of Internal Climate Variability in
Projecting Antarctica’s Contribution to Future Sea-Level Rise,” Climate Variability, vol. 55 (July 18, 2020), pp. 1875-
1892.
149 Meredith et al., IPCC Special Report Chapter 3, “Polar Regions,” p. 275.
150 For example, see Kelly Falkner, “ Antarctica.”
Congressional Research Service
25

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Antarctica and COVID-19
The threat of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infiltrating research bases in Antarctica
led several countries to reduce personnel in research bases and limit research activities in mid-
2020. There were no recorded cases of the COVID-19 on Antarctica until December 2020, when
the Chilean Army reported 36 cases at its Bernardo O’Higgins research station on the Antarctic
Peninsula.151 U.S. research station administrators note that bases do not have medical facilities to
adequately address a full-scale outbreak of COVID-19.152 To keep the virus from the continent,
the United States, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom in June 2020 announced plans to
partial y cancel their summer (October 2020-March 2021) field research. 153 Other countries
announced they would rely on remote equipment or limited staffing.154 Some experts assert that
activities by China and Russia are being maintained.155
Congress might consider how to ensure long-term research and continuous data collection are not
interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, whether research and data collection were interrupted,
and how limited staff might keep the work going. Further, Congress may address whether the
United States should consider encouraging China, Russia, and other countries to share
information collected during this period, especial y given the reduced presence of the United
States and other countries in Antarctica.

Author Information

Pervaze A. Sheikh
Kezee Procita
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Senior Research Librarian

Bruce Vaughn

Specialist in Asian Affairs

151 Isabella Kwai, “With First Positive Tests in Antarctica, No Continent is Untouched by the Virus,” New York Times,
December 22, 2020.
152 Falkner, “ Antarctica.”
153 Paul Voosen, “Coronavirus Forces United States, United Kingdom to Cancel Antarctic Field Research,” Science,
June 12, 2020.
154 Di Minardi, “Antarctica is the Last Continent Without COVID-19. Scientists Want to Keep It T hat Way,” National
Geographic, August 7, 2020.
155 Feiger and Wilson, “ Countries T aking Advantage.”
Congressional Research Service
26

Antarctica: Overview of Geopolitical and Environmental Issues

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should n ot be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R46708 · VERSION 1 · NEW
27