Is the United States inadvertently ceding its influence in Antarctica to its rivals?
As Donald Trump focuses on securing arctic Greenland, there are concerns that he may be neglecting the opposite end of the globe, potentially allowing nations like China to gain a foothold in Antarctica.
While America’s intentions regarding Greenland are clear and strategic, its diminishing presence in Antarctica seems more like an unintended consequence.
Recent proposed reductions in funding for climate-related research, which encompasses much of the critical work being conducted in the fast-melting Antarctic region, have been described as "catastrophic" by Professor Ted Scambos, a glaciologist at the University of Colorado who has extensive experience in U.S. Antarctic research.
In Antarctica, scientific research plays a vital role in how countries assert their influence on the continent. The 1959 Antarctic Treaty explicitly prohibits any military or commercial activities within this icy expanse.
Before the treaty's establishment, the UK, along with Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, and Norway, had laid claims to various portions of Antarctica. These territorial claims were effectively put on hold under the treaty; however, any nation can still engage in scientific exploration.
Countries interested in the region maintain their presence through scientists, research stations, and essential support equipment such as icebreakers and aircraft.
The UK exemplifies this approach. Its research facilities at Rothera on the West Antarctic Peninsula and Halley VI further east are strategically positioned within its wedge-shaped territorial claim extending from the coast to the South Pole.
Professor Dame Jane Francis, director of the British Antarctic Survey, candidly acknowledges that their scientific endeavors serve dual purposes: "The Antarctic treaty states that Antarctica is dedicated to peace and science. We contribute to this treaty by conducting world-class science while also ensuring a UK presence in Antarctica."
Sir David Attenborough symbolizes the UK's commitment to Antarctic geopolitics—not personally, but through the £200 million research icebreaker named after him, which functions as both a floating laboratory and a supply vessel for British bases.
For decades, the United States has been one of the most influential players on a continent that is one and a half times larger than the contiguous United States. The South Pole Station stands as one of the largest and most well-funded research bases on the continent, strategically located where all other territorial claims intersect.
However, due to budget cuts initiated by Mr. Trump and the decision not to renew the lease for its sole Antarctic icebreaker, the U.S. now finds itself without a dedicated vessel and significantly fewer scientists stationed in Antarctica.
This situation has led the U.S. to lease an icebreaker from Ukraine to sustain its operations this year—an unusual predicament that has not gone unnoticed in global circles.
Professor Francis remarked, "There is a shift in leadership and a change in the balance of power, if you will." This scenario could open up fresh opportunities for the UK to establish new research collaborations, but it also presents possibilities for others.
China has been rapidly expanding its footprint in Antarctica. The Chinese Antarctic research agency, CHINARE, currently operates five bases on the continent and unveiled a new year-round facility last year, with plans for another one in development.
In 2024, China launched a new icebreaking ship, which, along with its predecessor, is currently active around Antarctica. Like other nations party to the Antarctic Treaty, China conducts scientific research, often collaborating with other countries.
However, there are indications that both China and Russia may harbor interests beyond the treaty's scientific framework. For instance, China has opposed initiatives aimed at enhancing the protection of fisheries in the Southern Ocean, while Russia claimed to have discovered what it describes as the world’s largest oil reserve beneath Antarctica’s seabed in 2020. Moscow maintains that the exploration efforts were scientific, with no immediate plans to exploit these resources.
Professor Scambos noted, "Countries that are part of the Antarctic Treaty are present primarily for scientific research, but they are also eyeing any potential future scenarios for Antarctica, whether that entails preserving the treaty or reevaluating it in terms of resource extraction."
So far, no nation has formally attempted to withdraw from or amend the treaty. Unlike the Arctic, Antarctica's remoteness diminishes its geopolitical importance in the eyes of many major powers. Its inaccessibility, coupled with perennial sea ice and extended periods of darkness, explains why its natural resources have largely been overlooked.
Yet, similar to the Arctic, Antarctica is experiencing warming temperatures and melting ice sheets. With the Trump administration indicating a willingness to disregard territorial agreements in regions like Greenland, one must wonder how long Antarctica will remain untouched.
