As Donald Trump fights for control of arctic Greenland, is he losing at the other end of the world and leaving it open for rivals like China?
While US designs on Greenland are entirely deliberate, withdrawal of influence in Antarctica appears to be accidental.
Proposed cuts to climate-related research – which covers much of what is done in the rapidly melting Antarctic – are “catastrophic”, according to Prof Ted Scambos, a glaciologist at the University of Colorado and veteran of US Antarctic research.
In Antarctica, cuts to science have wider implications because research is how nations have long maintained their influence in the continent.
The 1959 Antarctic treaty prohibits military or commercial activities on the frozen continent.
Prior to that, the UK along with Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand and Norway had territorial claims on parts of the continent.
Chile’s president visited the South Pole in January last year. Pic: Presidential Palace/Reuters
Those claims are “in abeyance” – effectively suspended – under the treaty, but any nation can do scientific research.
Those with interests in the region, maintain their presence via scientists, research stations and the hardware like icebreakers and aircraft needed to support them.
The UK is no exception.
Its research bases at Rothera on the West Antarctic Peninsula and Halley VI further east, are located at the boundaries of its wedge-shaped claim to the continent extending from the coast to the South Pole.
It makes no secret of the fact the scientific presence serves two purposes. “The Antarctic treaty says that Antarctica is a continent for peace and science,” said Prof Dame Jane Francis, director of the British Antarctic Survey.
“We are contributing to…
