Australia has extensive interests in, and has taken a long term interest over, Antarctica. These interests include a territorial claim to the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) encompassing 42 per cent of the continent. In addition to its interests as a claimant state Australian participated in the negotiation of the Antarctic Treaty and has devoted itself to a major role in the Antarctic Treaty system (ATS), firmly committing to upholding the twin pillars of the Treaty: ‘peace’ and ‘science’.

Australia's management of its national interests and commitment to international collaboration has provided an important contribution to the Antarctic Treaty, witnessed by hosting the first meeting of Antarctic Treaty consultative parties (ATCPs) following entry into force of the Treaty in 1961 and its active involvement in the development of ATS. Australian engagement is underpinned by longstanding and bi-partisan domestic political support for Australia's involvement within the ATS, together with commitments to maintaining the AAT: a stance that has been termed ‘bi-focalism’.

Australia had a major role in negotiating capstone features of the Antarctic Treaty. This instrument, established in the cold war, is noteworthy for its commitment to demilitarising a continent (and surrounding ocean) and establishing a nuclear free zone, and establishing an innovative inspection regime. These were issues central to Australia's concerns in the 1950s in the wake of anxieties shared by other southern hemispheric countries relating to the Antarctic's possible use as a nuclear testing site and/or dumping ground. From the mid 1970s through the 1980s Australia took part in negotiations over first, the management of marine living resources, and second, mineral resources. In the 1980s, too, Australia took a lead role in addressing significant challenges to the Antarctic Treaty, first in response to the ‘Question of Antarctica’ in the United Nations and secondly in relation to the question of environmental protection for Antarctica in the wake of negotiations over a proposed minerals regime.

Australia's commitment to the values and principles of the Antarctic Treaty, yet retaining its interests as a ‘claimant state’ thereby balancing national interests with commitments to consensus, peace and collaboration, has contributed in no small part to the endurance of the Antarctic Treaty, and through its evolution to the broader based instruments and institutions comprising the ATS. Australia has defended the ATS but has also been prepared to advocate change, for example in its advocacy for environmental protection, in the face of criticism, while at the same time has been conscious of the need to maintain the system's stability.

If Australia has provided a major contribution to ‘peace’ through its advocacy of demilitarisation of Antarctica and its ongoing engagement with the ATS, so too did its commitment to ‘science’. Australian scientists (Louis Bernacchi, T W Edgeworth David, Griffith Taylor and, most famously, Douglas Mawson) participated in a number of expeditions during the period 1890–1914, the so called ‘heroic era’ of Antarctic exploration, that has helped reinforce Australia's interests in, and what became later territorial claims to, Antarctica. Mawson's contribution stands alone in terms of its influence on Australian interests in the Antarctic (see, among others, Haward and others Reference Haward, Rothwell, Jabour, Hall, Kellow, Kriwoken, Lugten and Hemmings2006), and it includes a contribution to Australian Antarctic policy until his death in October 1958. This commitment to science drove the establishment of the Australian National Antarctic Research Expeditions (ANARE) in 1947, a continental year round science presence from 1954 (at the appropriately named Mawson Station) and participation in the 1957–1958 International Geophysical Year.

Australia's Antarctic science programme broadened from its initial focus in the 1950s and 1960s on physical and atmospheric sciences to include major programmes in Antarctic marine living resources, atmospheric sciences, biology, geosciences, glaciology, human impacts, oceanography, human biology and medicine, cosmic ray physics and astronomy by the 1990s. The Australian government's Antarctic Science Advisory Committee (ASAC) commissioned an external evaluation of the Antarctic science programme in 2002–2003. This led to the release of a five year science programme (2004–2005 to 2008–2009) that refocused scientific research into four multi-disciplinary programmes: ice, oceans and climate; Southern Ocean ecosystems; adaptation to environmental change; and impact of human activity in Antarctica. The International Polar Year (IPY) 2007–2009 provided an impetus to Australian Antarctic marine science through the Census of Antarctic Marine Life (CAML). CAML involved major research cruises during the IPY and involved Australia scientists collaborating with those of a number of other countries.

Mawson's work, while laying the basis for ongoing scientific endeavour in Antarctica, was also important in formalising Australia's interests though its subsequent territorial claim. Mawson raised the Union Flag on Proclamation Island on 13 January 1930, ‘to assert the sovereign rights of His Majesty over British land discoveries met within Antarctica. . .’. This proclamation was repeated from the cockpit of a Tiger Moth plane that was flown along the coastline, dropping a Union Flag onto the ice on 25 January 1930 (see Collis Reference Collis2004; Haward and others Reference Haward, Rothwell, Jabour, Hall, Kellow, Kriwoken, Lugten and Hemmings2006). Such actions during the British, Australian and New Zealand Antarctic Research Expeditions (BANZARE) in 1929–1931, claiming the territory for Britain and King George V by Mawson, placed Australia at the centre of imperial policy towards Antarctica. Administration of what became the AAT was transferred to Australia from Great Britain on 7 February 1933 through an imperial order in council, with the Australian Antarctic Territory Acceptance Act passed by the Commonwealth parliament the same year. This legislation was given effect by proclamation by the governor general of Australia on 24 August 1936.

Despite a century of close links, Australia surprisingly lacks a publicly accessible statement on its Antarctic ‘policy’. In an important survey in 1984 Brook noted that Australia's policy interests included: sovereignty; neutrality; protection of the Antarctic environment; Antarctic science; involvement in Antarctica; and benefit (Brook Reference Brook and Harris1984: 256–259). These interests, and the essence of Australia's policy toward Antarctica (see contributions in Kriwoken and others Reference Kriwoken, Jabour and Hemmings2007), are pursued through the goals of the Australian Antarctic programme These four goals are:

Australia's support for the Antarctic Treaty and the ATS is reinforced by the first goal that, inter alia, reinforces Australia's engagement within the system. This engagement has been pivotal, and arguably of major significance in shaping the ATS, responding to external and internal challenges to the system. Importantly, though, Australia has worked hard to ensure that these activities ‘maintain the Antarctic Treaty System’.

Australia's work in the development of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) is an example of engagement shaping the system. CCAMLR was developed in response to concerns over the potential unregulated harvesting of krill and was the impetus for the negotiations over Antarctic marine living resources, first raised at ATCM IX held in 1977. In addition to its active participation in the negotiation of the convention, Australia hosted the final conference of parties, became depositary state for the convention, and provides significant support to the commission secretariat, headquartered in Hobart, Australia. An Australian, Dr Darry Powell, served as the first executive secretary of the CCAMLR commission in 1982–1992.

Australia has been active in developing and helping to put into operation CCAMLR's ecosystem based management approach, and has also been active in ensuring that CCAMLR has provided an important focus to address emergent issues within high seas fisheries in the years following the entry into force of the Law of the Sea Convention in 1994. This has included a major effort to address what has become known as illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing for toothfish species in the CCAMLR convention area. In addition to promoting stronger action from within CCAMLR Australia has also been prepared to advance new approaches to the problem. Australia was an active participant in discussion of a catch documentation scheme for toothfish species, a tool that has contributed greatly to addressing the IUU problem in this fishery. Other Australian initiatives have, however, been less successful. In 2002, at the 21st CCAMLR meeting, Australia proposed listing of toothfish on Appendix 2 of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). This proposal received strong opposition from parties who disagreed with Australia's position and who were opposed to utilising CITES. Only New Zealand supported the initiative while 19 other parties opposed it.

Other examples in CCAMLR show Australia having more success. Along with other like minded parties Australia has been instrumental in addressing the problem of the incidental catch of seabirds associated with longline fisheries within CCAMLR. This work has been influential in moving the problem to other forums, action that led to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation's international plan of action for reducing incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries and the negotiation of the Agreement for the Conservation of Albatross and Petrels (ACAP). ACAP is not a part of the ATS, being subordinated to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, but its state parties are all ATCPs, and there are strong links to the ATS.

Australia took a lead in responding to a major external challenge to the legitimacy of the Antarctic Treaty and Antarctic Treaty System posed by Malaysia's concern over the ‘Question of Antarctica’ first raised at the United Nations General Assembly in 1983. Malaysia's central contention was that Antarctica should be designated as the ‘common heritage of mankind’, to protect the interests of developing nations. It also claimed that the Antarctic Treaty was flawed because the ATCM decision making process excluded non-consultative parties and the views of the wider international community, and was one of the final reminders of a ‘colonialist order’ not least because of the existence of seven claimant states including Australia and the continued participation of South Africa. Malaysia also raised questions over the capacity of the ATS to ensure the protection of the Antarctic environment. This, according to Malaysia, had occurred because the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) had only an advisory role at ATCMs. This element of Malaysia's critique anticipated a further internal challenge to the robustness of the treaty system over mineral exploitation.

Australia, through its ambassador to the United Nations, Richard Woolcott, chaired the Antarctic Treaty group in New York, and Australia took the lead in responding to Malaysia's challenge. Woolcott had extensive experience in southeast Asia, including an appointment to the Australian High Commission in Malaysia in the early 1960s. Australia's leadership in the debate on behalf of the ATCPs reflected its clear Antarctic interests, with Woolcott also working to bridge the gap between Malaysia and the ATCPs. This work bore fruit in the following years with Australia supporting the ATCM's ‘invitation to observe’ to Malaysia and extending scientific links and Antarctic educational exchanges between the two countries.

Despite Australia's commitment to the Antarctic Treaty and the ATS it was also a central player in the most significant internal challenge to fundamentals of this system. Australia's decision not to sign the Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities (CRAMRA) in 1989 was significant and was criticised as destabilising the ATS. At the same time this action can seen as balancing Australia's national interests with its commitment to work within the ATS, an excellent (if dramatic) example of bi-focalism. Australia's concerns over CRAMRA, supported by France, were pivotal in leading effectively to scuttling the ‘minerals convention’, as CRAMRA became popularly known, and initiating negotiations that led to the development of the protocol on environmental protection to the Antarctic Treaty. The Australian government's opposition to CRAMRA centred on the problem of environmental protection, safeguarding Australia's territorial claim and concerns over the subsidisation of mineral exploration and extraction (Bergin Reference Bergin1991). Australia has been active in the development of the protocol, with Dr Tony Press, then director of the Australian Antarctic Division, serving as chair of the committee for environmental protection from 2002–2006.

Australia has specific interests in the Southern Ocean, most notably sovereign territory of Heard and McDonald Islands, and Macquarie Island. The former occurs within CCAMLR Area. The sub-Antarctic islands, under national jurisdiction and outside the treaty area can legitimately generate exclusive economic zones and continental shelves. Heard Island, for example, due to its distinctive seabed geomorphology, generates a large area that can be delimited as an extended ‘legal continental shelf’ under Article 76 of the Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC). Part of this continental shelf extends in to the Antarctic Treaty area (south of latitude 60°S). Australia has been sensitive to differing interpretations of the application of the convention to the Antarctic Treaty area. The Australian government declared a 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone off the Australian Antarctic Territory in 1994 but only enforces Australian law in this area against Australian nationals and/or vessels.

Australia began a major scientific, legal and diplomatic project to collect data to support its claim for an extended ‘legal continental shelf’ under Article 76 of the LOSC in the mid 1990s. This included survey work around continental Australia, its offshore islands (including the sub-Antarctic Heard and McDonald and Macquarie Islands) and the Australian Antarctic Territory. The Australian government recognised the sensitivity of the issue (with regard to Article IV of the Antarctic Treaty) and considerable diplomatic work was undertaken explaining Australia's position to Antarctic Treaty parties. Australia lodged its data supporting its claim for an extended continental shelf to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) on 15 November 2004, within the 10 year time frame outlined in the LOSC. In a note to the secretary-general of the United Nations that accompanied its submission ‘Australia recalls the principles and objectives shared by the Antarctic Treaty and UNCLOS, and the importance of the Antarctic system and UNCLOS working in harmony and thereby ensuring the continuing peaceful cooperation, security and stability in the Antarctic Area’ (Australia 2004).

This submission requested that ‘the Commission in accordance with its rules not to take any action for the time being with regard to the information in this submission that relates to continental shelf appurtenant to Antarctica’ (Australia 2004). This request was agreed to by the CLCS. In response to a note verbale from the United Nations secretary-general informing member states of the Australian submission, seven states provided comments. The general tenor of these notes recognised the importance of maintaining stability of the Antarctic Treaty and welcomed Australia's request to the CLCS not to consider the area off the Australian Antarctic Territory. Thus Australia had achieved its twin objectives of maintaining its interest as a claimant, and protecting the stability of the ATS. On 9 April 2008 the CLCS adopted recommendations for Australia's extended continental shelf with minor adjustments made to the Australian submission including a small area off Heard and McDonald Islands.

This brief discussion of Australia's engagement with the Antarctic Treaty highlights common features. Australia has maintained a commitment to the treaty and has been prepared to defend the treaty against external critics while at the same time has been unafraid to advocate new approaches that support the national interest, even if, as in the case of the challenge to CRAMRA, or the CITES listing proposal in CCAMLR, these face considerable opposition from within. It has maintained its commitment to the Antarctic Treaty as a means of best serving its national interests, while never derogating its claim to the Australian Antarctic Territory, reflecting a century of direct involvement in Antarctica and almost fifty years as an active ATCP. Australia's contribution will be symbolically and substantively recognised with its hosting of the 35th ATCM in 2012.