The Antarctic Treaty as a Treaty Providing for an Objective Regime

Thus, Ren6-Jean Dupuy wrote in 1960 that what had happened with regard to Antarctica was that un coll&ge international se comporte comme un ensemble gouvernemental et organise le statut d'une r6gion.... Pour que ce statut soit valable pour les nonsignataires, encore faut-il que ceux qui Pont &abli soient en &at de le faire respecter .... Admettons qu'il s'agit d'un trait6 portant statut d'un territoire et, comme tel, opposable erga omnes.Accept6 ou non, formellement ou tacitement, par le reste de la collectivit6 internationale, aucun 6l6ment exterieur A lui ne peut .... modifier sans leur accord, le r6le particulier des douze.5The same view was expressed in a major Soviet textbook of international law which stated categorically that the Antarctic Treaty must be considered valid erga omnes.6 Interestingly, the leading Soviet international lawyer, Professor Tunkin, who had represented the Soviet Union at the Washington Conference, held a quite different opinion.Professor Tunkin maintained that the Antarctic Treaty intended "to create a regime which could become universally accepted.But there had been no intention of imposing that regime: any attempt to do so would have been illegal."'7 A majority of commentators share this view.8 see Hayton, The Antarctic Settlement of 1959, 54 AM.