The United Nations and Antarctica, 2005: the end of the ‘Question of Antarctica’?
The United Nations and Antarctica, 2005: the end of the ‘Question of Antarctica’?
复制标题
联合国与南极洲，2005 年：“南极洲问题”的终结？
DOI：
10.1017/s003224740600533x
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
0.8
通讯作者：
P. Beck
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Beck
2005年11月，联合国第一委员会再次讨论“南极洲问题”。马来西亚政府于1983年将这一议题正式列入联合国议程后，联合国开始定期讨论这一议题，最初是每年一次，后来是每两年一次，最近是每三年一次。与往常一样，2005年联合国成员国遵循联合国环境规划署（环境署）为联合国秘书长（秘书长）编写的一份长篇报告，该报告概述了影响南极洲和南极条约体系（ATS）的最新发展。2005年11月，联合国第一委员会根据马来西亚代表团提出的拟议修正案采取行动，同意对方针作出重大改变。因此，委员会未经表决通过的L 60号决议规定，联合国虽然仍在“处理”“舌提卡问题"，但不会将该议题列入第63届会议议程。2008年的会议。此后，也不要求联合国秘书长为成员国编写关于南极洲的报告。2005年12月，联合国大会再次未经表决通过了L 60号决议草案，成为第60/47号决议。因此，自1983年以来，联合国第一次不再计划回到“舌提卡问题”。与此同时，这一事件引发了有关未来事态发展的有趣问题：联合国在“南极洲问题”中的作用（如果有的话），马来西亚对ATS的政策方向，包括其成员资格;南极条约协商国（ATCP）继续有能力以民主、透明和负责任的方式管理南极洲，而不会招致更广泛的国际社会的批评;以及共同遗产原则与南极地区的相关性。
In November 2005 the ‘Question of Antarctica’ was taken up yet again by the UN First Committee. Following formal placement upon its agenda in 1983 by the Malaysian government, the UN has discussed the topic regularly, initially annually, then biennially, but more recently upon a triennial basis. As usual, in 2005 UN members were guided by a lengthy report produced for the United Nations Secretary General (UNSG) by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in order to outline recent developments affecting Antarctica and the Antarctic Treaty system (ATS). In November 2005 the UN First Committee, acting upon proposed amendments advanced by the Malaysian delegation, agreed to a major change of course. Thus, resolution L60, adopted by the committee without a vote, stipulated that the UN, though remaining ‘seized’ of the ‘Question of Antarctica’, would not place the topic upon the agenda of the 63rd. session in 2008. Nor would the UNSG be required, henceforth, to produce a report on Antarctica for members. In December 2005, the UN General Assembly adopted draft resolution L60 as resolution 60/47, once again without a vote. As a result, for the first time since 1983, the UN is no longer scheduled to return to the ‘Question of Antarctica’. Meanwhile, the episode has raised interesting questions about future developments: the UN's role, if any, in the ‘Question of Antarctica’, the direction of Malaysian policy towards the ATS, including membership thereof; the continued ability of the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties (ATCPs) to manage Antarctica in a democratic, transparent and accountable manner without attracting criticism from the broader international community; and the relevance of the common heritage principle to the Antarctic region.