Touching on the modern politics of Antarctica and the shifting interests that the USA and people of other nations had in that continent, this paper examines the imprint of politics and culture on US public discourse about the US Antarctic research program. It argues that US government officials, scientists, and mass media responded to one another, evolving cultural values, and these dynamic politics and interests by changing the way they depicted scientific exploration in Antarctica. Initially treating this exploration as a manly attempt to know the world and conquer its last uninhabited continent, these pundits came to regard Antarctic science as a means of protecting an endangered continental wilderness, while using it to study humanity’s most pressing env ronmental crises. In doing so, however, they clung to an unchanging discourse celebrating US Antarctic research as proof of the benevolent world leadership by the USA, of its unstinting desire to advance peace, security, and prosperity for all humanity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1 By “public discourse” I mean discussion and debate about Antarctic research by individuals and institutions with the expertise, authority, and national audiences to affect people’s understanding and attitudes about US exploratory activities in the south polar region. Public discourse can reverberate in private conversations among individuals, but it takes place primarily in public arenas of government—congressional hearings, government reports, etc.—as well as in mass media—newspapers, magazines, journals, radio and television, and museums and theme parks.
2.
2 By “technocracy” this paper does not mean the control and administration of government by an apolitical group of engineer-managers, but rather a more common meaning of this flexible term: a model of “statesupported, perpetual technological revolution” in which government funds scientific research and technological development in support of national social, political, economic, and military goals. See Walter McDougall, The Heavens and the Earth: A Political History of the Space Age ( New York: Basic Books, Inc. , 1985).
3.
3 Work on the slippery meaning of “big science and technology” includes: Robert Smith, “Large-scale scientific enterprise,” in Encyclopedia of the United States in the Twentieth Century, ed. Stanley Kutler ( New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons , 1996); James H. Capshew and Karen A. Rader, “Big science: price to the present”, Osiris, 2nd series, 1992; and Derek J. de Solla Price, Little Science, Big Science (New York: Oxford University Press, 1963).
4.
4 Each federal technoscience program had its own array of supporters, each of which had its own special interests in that program. Rather than offering a confusing jumble of narrow justifications for the program, these diverse advocates cultivated public support by identifying the higher purposes and expected benefits all people would enjoy from the program. These higher purposes and expected benefits were invariably pinned to public concerns of the day, thus raising that technoscience program as an enduring expression of a progressive nation rather than the pork barrel prize of selected interest groups. In the case of the US Antarctic program, journalists so often shared the optimism projected by its supporters—the National Science Foundation, State Department, White House, polar scientists—because they sincerely believed in the virtues of the program and because they depended on these supporters for access to Antarctica and information about the program.
5.
5 On the popularization of science, see: Dorothy Nelkin, Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology ( New York: W. H. Freeman and Co. , 1987); John Burnham, How Superstition Won and Science Lost: Popularizing Science and Health in the United States (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1987); and Bruce V. Lewenstein, “The meaning of ‘public understanding of science’ in the United States after World War II,” Public Understanding of Science, January 1992, 45–68.
6.
6 David Boyer, “Year of discovery opens in Antarctica”, National Geographic, October 1959; NBC, “Assault on Antarctica,” 18 January 1960, Library of Congress Television and Film Archives.
7.
7 Examples include: Priit J. Vestiliad, “Antarctica”, National Geographic, April 1987; Dick Thompson, “Stains on the White Continent,” Time, 20 February 1989; Bryan Hodgson, “A land of isolation no more: Antarctica,” National Geographic, April 1990; Michael Cross, “Antarctica: exploration or exploitation,” New Scientist, 22 June 1991; Antarctica: The Last Continent, KQED Inc., 1987; Antarctica on the Edge: Impending Ecological Doom, KQED Inc., 1987; Antarctica, Omnimax Films, 1991.
8.
8 Some notable works from these fields include: F. M. Auburn, Antarctic Law and Politics ( Bloomington: Indiana University Press , 1982); Peter Beck, The International Politics of Antarctica (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1986); Olav Schram Stokke and Davor Vidas, eds, Governing the Antarctic: The Effectiveness and Legitimacy of the Antarctic Treaty System (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Christopher C. Joyner, Governing the Frozen Commons: The Antarctic Regime and Environmental Protection (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1998); Aant Elzinga, ed., Changing Trends in Antarctic Research (Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic, 1993); and G. E. Fogg, A History of Antarctic Science (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992).
9.
9 Hugh L. Dryden, “The International Geophysical Year: Man’s most ambitious study of his environment,” National Geographic (February 1956): 285-285 .
10.
10 Work on the relationship between US military interests and basic scientific research include: Stuart W. Leslie, The Cold War and American Science: The Military–Industrial–Academic Complex at MIT and Stanford ( New York: Columbia University Press , 1993); Paul Forman and Jose Sanchez-Ron, eds, National Military Establishments and the Advancement of Science and Technology: Studies in Twentieth-Century History(Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic, 1996); David DeVorkin, Science With a Vengeance: How the Military Created the US Space Sciences After World War II (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1992); and Ronald Doel, Solar System Astronomy in America: Communities, Patronage, and Interdisciplinary Science, 1920–1960 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996).
11.
11 “Soviet Claiming Lead in Science,” The New York Times (5 October 1957): 2-2 .
12.
12 Coordinating Committee on General Sciences, Report on US Program for the International Geophysical Year, 19 May 1954. National Archives, RG 313, Records of the Commander, Admiral’s files, 1954–56. Box 1, file “DOD Coordinating Committee on General Sciences.”
13.
13 The ten other nations were: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Great Britain, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, and South Africa.
14.
14 The nations that claimed sovereignty over portions of Antarctica (and years those claims were made) were: Great Britain (1908), New Zealand (1923), France (1924), Australia (1933), Norway (1939), Chile (1940), and Argentina (1942).
15.
15 Quoted in the 7 February 1955 secure Foreign Service Dispatch from the American Embassy of Moscow to the Department of State titled “Soviet Interest in Antarctica.” National Archives, RG 59 Department of State, 1955–59 Central Decimal File, Box 2773, file 702.022/2–755; Secret “Statement of Policy by the National Security Council on Antarctica,” 16 July 1954. National Archives, RG 313, Records of the Naval Operating Forces, Formerly Classified Records, 1954–72, Box 1, file 1954.
16.
16 Confidential Department of State Memorandum, “Antarctic Matters,” 21 October 1955. National Archives, RG 59 Department of State, 1955–59 Central Decimal File, Box 2773, file 702.022/6–155.
17.
17 Representative Oren Harris letter to President Eisenhower, 17 January 1958. National Archives, RG 59 Department of State, 1955–59 Central Decimal File, Box 2773, file 702.022/4-157.
18.
18 “Statement by the President Concerning Antarctica,” 3 May 1958. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1958 ( Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office , 1959): 368-368.
19.
19 Secret “Definition of Basic US Positions Respecting Antarctica,” 30 January 1958. National Archives, RG 59 Department of State, 1955–59 Central Decimal File, Box 2773, file 702.022/4-159.
20.
20 Quoted from Article IX of the Antarctic Treaty, in US Department of State, Handbook of the Antarctic Treaty System, 8th edition (1994), 13-13.
21.
21 “Soviet claiming lead in science,” The New York Times (5 October 1957): 2-2; “A proposal for a ‘Giant Leap’,” Life (16 November 1957): 53.
22.
22 Testimony of Livingston T. Merchant, Review of the Space Program , House Committee on Science and Astonautics. 86th cong., 2nd sess., 20, 22, 25–29 January, 1–5 February 1960, 3-3 .
23.
23 Works on the space program include: John M. Logsdon, The Decision to Go to the Moon: Project Apollo and the NationalInterest ( Cambridge, MA: MIT Press , 1970); McDougall, The Heavens and the Earth, 1985 (cit. no 2); Rip Bulkeley, The Sputnik Crisis and Early United States Space Policy (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1991); Dale Carter, The Final Frontier: The Rise and Fall of the American Rocket State (New York: Verso, 1988); Robert A. Divine, The Sputnik Challenge (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).
24.
24 Statement by L. V. Berkner, House Subcommittee on Territorial and Insular Affairs, 10 June 1960. Library of Congress Manuscript Division, Berkner Papers, Box 21, file “Statement on Antarctica, 10 June 1960.”
25.
25 For an in-depth analysis of Lloyd Berkner’s involvement in US early space and Antarctic programs, see Needell, Science, Cold War and the American State ( Amsterdam: Harwood Academic , 2000).
26.
26 Secret “Definition of Basic US Purposes in Seeking the Treaty,” 4 May 1959. National Archives, RG 59 Department of State, 1955–59 Central Decimal Files, Box 2773, file 202.22/4-159.
27.
27 Confidential State Department “Statement of US Objectives Regarding Antarctica and Courses of Action During the Next Several years,” 12 July 1962. National Archives, RG 313 Naval Operating Forces, formerly Classified Records, 1954–72, Box 1, file “1963.”
28.
28 Confidential “Belgian Operations in Antarctica,” 8 November 1960. National Archives, RG 313 Records of Naval Operating Forces, US Naval Support Force, Antarctica, Formerly Classified Records, 1954–72, Box 3, file “1960”; Classified “Belgian request for US Assistance in Antarctica,” 5 March 1963. RG 59 Department of State, Central Foreign Policy Files, 1963, Box 4168, file “SCI-Science & Technology ANT-ARG”; Harland Cleveland confidential letter to Leland Haworth, 6 August 1964. National Archives, RG 59 Department of State, Central Foreign Policy Files, 1964–66, Box 3093, file “SCI 11–1 ANT.”
29.
29 Alan T. Waterman memo “Proposed Program for Improving Public Understanding of the Role of Science,” 20 June 1958. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-1 Office of the Director, Box 33, file “Public Information.”
30.
30 US Congress. House Subcommittee on Territorial and Insular Affairs. Antarctic Report, 1962. 87th cong., 2nd sess., 25 May 1962, 1.
31.
31 T. O. Jones, Head of the NSF Office of Polar Programs, to Alan Waterman, “Antarctic film of the US Navy,” 15 January 1963. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-1 Office of the Director, 1949–63, Box 69, Office of Antarctic Programs, 1963.
32.
32 “Proposal for a Color Motion Picture,” 1962. National Archives, RG 307 National Science Foundation, E-30 Office of Antarctic Programs, Central Files, Box 191, 114.6, “Films 1961–1967.”
33.
33 Documents elaborating the process by which these agency officials collectively drafted the “Midwinter Messages” and thereby decided how to represent the USA’s Antarctic activities publicly include: Alan Waterman (Head of NSF) letter to McGeorge Bundy (National Security Advisor), 1 June 1962. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-39 Office of Antarctic Programs, Central Files, Box 124, file “The White House Office”; and John T. Wilson (Acting Director, NSF) letter to Donald F. Hornig (Director, Office of Science and Technology), 15 June 1967. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-39 Office of Antarctic Programs, Central Files, Box 89, file “Midwinter Message File 1961–.”
34.
34 “Future importance for the wasteland,” Life (21 November 1960): 85-85 .
35.
35 “Antarctica... now a ‘thaw’ in the coldest place of all?,” Newsweek (26 October 1959): 58-58 .
36.
36 McDougall, The Heavens and the Earth, 1995 (cit. no. 2); Richard G. Hewlett and Jack M. Holl, Atoms for Peace and War, 1953–1961, (Berkeley, CA., 1989).
37.
37 US Antarctic Projects Office, Introduction to Antarctica ( Washington, DC: NSF , 1961), 44-44.
38.
38 Official Guide, New York World’s Fair, 1964/1965, ( New York: Time Inc. , 1964), 76-76, 180-180; Michael L. Smith, “Making Time: Representations of Technology at the 1964 World’s Fair”, in The Power of Culture: Critical Essays in American History, eds Richard Wightman Fox and T. J. Jackson Lears, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 239.
39.
39 Walter Sullivan, “Why Antarctica is being explored,” New York Times Magazine (6 March 1960): 20-20 ; Introduction to Antarctica (National Science Foundation, 1969), 46.
40.
40 Albert Crary, “Where is science taking us?,” The Saturday Review(3 March 1962): 40-40 .
41.
41 Dr. Wernher von Braun, “A space man’s look at Antarctica,” Popular Science May (1967); and “NASA officials visit Antarctica,” Antarctic Journal of the United States March–April (1967):, 52.
42.
42 Samuel Matthews, “Antarctica: icy testing ground for space,” National Geographic (October 1968): 570-570.
43.
43 Harold M. Schmeck, Jr, “From dog sled to ski-plane,” New York Times Magazine (25 February 1962): 24-24.
44.
44 James T. Patterson, Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945–1974 ( New York: Oxford University Press , 1996), 317-317.
45.
45 “Man of the year, twenty five and under,” Time (6 January 1967): 18-18 .
46.
46 CBS, “The Mighty Atom,” The 21st Century (14 May 1967). Library of Congress Television and Film Archives.
47.
47 “Nuclear Power Comes to Antarctica,” Bulletin of the US Antarctic Projects Officer (March 1962): 10-10 .
48.
48 “Statement by President Lyndon B. Johnson,” Department of State Bulletin(21 June 1965): 1013-1013 .
49.
49 Proposed letter from Alan Waterman to Glenn Seaborg. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-39 Office of Antarctic Programs, Central Files, Box 88, file “Nuclear Reactors for Antarctica 63.”
50.
50 Jack Reniere explained this during a telephone interview conducted in 1997.
51.
51 Peter Briggs, Laboratory at the Bottom of the World ( New York: David McKay Co., Inc. , 1970), 148–149.
52.
52 This widespread concern was given public voice in such publications as: David Riesman et al., The Lonely Crowd ( New Haven, CT: Yale University Press , 1950); William H. Whyte, The Organization Man (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1956); C. Wright Mills, White Collar: The American Middle Classes (New York: Oxford University Press, 1951); Vance Packard, The Hidden Persuaders (New York, David McKay, Inc., 1957); Daniel Boorstin, The Image (New York: Atheneum, 1961); and Herbert Marcuse, One Dimensional Man(Boston, MA: Beacon, 1964).
53.
53 J. R. Killian, speech, “Making Science a Vital Force in Foreign Policy,” 23 September 1960. National Archives, RG 359 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology, Subject Files 1957–1962, Box 65, file “Ad Hoc Man-in-Space Panel.”
54.
54 Marcel LaFollette, Making Science Our Own: Public Images of Science, 1910–1955 ( Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press , 1990), 106-106.
55.
55 Philip Smith memo to T. O. Jones, “Meeting with Captain M. W. Nicholson,” 21 May 1964. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-39 Office of Antarctic Programs, Central Files, Box 59, file “Women in Antarctica.”
56.
56 1997 interview with retired Rear Admiral Lloyd Abbot, commander of the US Navy’s Antarctic operations, 1967–1969.
57.
57 Quoted in Barbara Land, The New Explorers: Women in Antarctic ( New York: Dodd, Mead & Co. , 1981), 214-214.
58.
58 Alan Waterman, Loyola University Commencement, “Our Swiftest Diligence,” 7 June 1982. Library of Congress Manuscripts, Alan T. Waterman Papers, Box 46, file “Our Swiftest Diligence,” 8.
59.
59 “Science in Antarctica,” Science (26 January 1968): 409-409 .
60.
60 David Boyer, “Year of discovery opens in Antarctica , National Geographic (October 1959): 342-342 .
61.
61 Rear Admiral George Dufek, “What we’ve accomplished in Antarctica,” National Geographic (October 1959): 555-555 .
62.
62 Michael L. Smith, “Selling the Moon: The US Manned Space Program and the Triumph of Commodity Scientism,” in The Culture of Consumption, eds Richard Wightman Fox and T. J. Jackson Lears ( New York: Pantheon Books , 1983), 205-205.
63.
63 Yaron Ezrahi, “The political resources of American science,” Science Studies1 (1971): 124-124 .
64.
64 “The Example of Antarctica,” The New York Times (9 December 1969): A54-A54
65.
65 Antarctica: Exploring the Frozen Continent, An Encyclopedia Britannica Educational Corporation Presentation and ABC Television Stations, 1979.
66.
66 Laurence M. Gould, “Antarctica: The world’s greatest laboratory,” The American Scholar (Summer 1971): 408-408 .
67.
67 National Science Foundation, Nineteenth Annual Report, 1969, (Washington, DC: US Government Printing House, 1970), Foreword.
68.
68 Dr. Wernher von Braun, Deputy Associate Administrator, NASA speech at the National Aviation Club, 27 May 1971. National Air and Space Museum Archives, OS-170884-54.
69.
69 I. I. Rabi, lecture “Government, Science, and Technology, Twilight of the Gods,” given at the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 25 June 1979. Library of Congress Manuscripts, Papers of I. I. Rabi, Box 64.
70.
70 The results of these polls were published in: Science Indicators 1972: Report of the National Science Board, 1973 ( Washington, DC: NSF , 1973); Science Indicators 1976, 1977; and Science Indicators 1980, 1981.
71.
71 A small sample of these articles is: Dr. Simon Ramo, “Using technology to advance human progress,” Nation’s Business (December 1976): 20–24 ; Edward Shils, “Faith, utility, and the legitimacy of science,” in Science and its Public: The Changing Relationship (Boston, MA: D. Reidel Publishers, Co., 1976): 1–16; Amitai Etzioni and Clyde Nunn, “The Public Appreciation of Science in Contemporary America,” in Science and its Public (1976): 229–244; and Steven Louis Goldman, “Present strains in the relations between science, technology, and society,” Science, Technology, and Human Value (Spring 1979): 44–51.
72.
72 The best-known account of the social foundations of scientific knowledge is: Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ( Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press , 1962).
73.
73 Leonard A. Redecke, NSF Deputy Director, Division of Grants and Contracts, diary note, “Comments of Dr. John Holmfeld, Science Policy consultant to the Committee on Science and Technology, US House of Representatives,” 5 April 1976. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-121 Reading File, 1976 Records of the Head, Division of Polar Programs, Box 2. A table of federal R&D spending from 1955 to 1994 is found in the Federal R&D Funding by Budget Function: Fiscal Years 1992–94, NSF 93-311, July 1993, 9.
74.
74 Richard S. Lewis, “Antarctic research and the relevance of science,” in Frozen Future: A Prophetic Report From Antarctica, eds Richard S. Lewis and Philip M. Smith ( New York: Quadrangle Books , 1973), 2-2.
75.
75 “United States Antarctic activities: Long-range projection,” Antarctic Journal of the United States (May–June 1966): 79–86 ; and Henry Dater, “The Antarctic Treaty in action, 1961–1971,” Antarctic Journal of the United States (May–June 1971): 67–72.
76.
76 Leigh H. Frederickson, “Environmental awareness at Hallett Station,” Antarctic Journal of the United States (May–June 1971): 57-57 .
77.
77 H. Guyford Stever to President Nixon. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-74, Program Documents, 1969–75, office of Polar Programs, Box 1, file “A National Program for the Study of Climate Fluctuations and Their Impact on Human Affairs, 1973–1974.”
78.
78 Joseph O. Fletcher, “Polar ice and the global climate machine,” Frozen Future (1973): 122-122.
79.
79 Samuel Matthews, “What’s happening to our climate?,” National Geographic (November 1976): 579-579 .
80.
80 “Recommendations of the Second World Conference on National Parks,” Supplement to IUCN Bulletin 3 (November 1972): 2-2 .
81.
81 “President Nixon Announces Review of US Policy for Antarctica,” Department of State Bulletin (9 November 1970): 573-573 .
82.
82 The Secret Land, MGM, 1948, National Archives film collection, 200, 310.
83.
83 Donella H. Meadows et al., The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome’s Project on the Predicament of Mankind ( New York: Universe Books , 1972).
84.
84 For instance, see: US Department of Commerce, United States Energy Through the Year 2000 ( Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office , 1972); The Nation’s Energy Future: A Report to the President of the United States (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1973); and National Science Board, Science and the Challenges Ahead (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1974).
85.
85 Patsy T. Mink, “Oceans: Antarctic Resource and Environmental Concerns,” Department of State Bulletin (April 1978): 51-51 .
86.
86 Walter Sullivan, “Introduction,” Frozen Future (1973): viii-viii.
87.
87 “Antarctic Oil is Estimated as Enormous,” Washington Post (1 March 1975): A6-A6 . On US Geological Survey estimates of Antarctic oil and gas and the concomitant interest of oil companies in Antarctica see: N. A. Wright and L. Williams, Mineral Resources of Antarctica, Geological Survey Circular 705, Department of Interior, 1974; NASF and USGS, Petroleum and Mineral Resources of Antarctica (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1983); and Office of Technology Assessment, Polar Prospects: A Minerals Treaty for Antarctica (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, September 1989).
88.
88 “Study Report for the Office of Management and Budget,” 1 May 1972, vi. National Archives, RG 307 NSF, E-68 Miscellaneous Documents, 1969–75, Box 1, file “United States Antarctic Program.”
89.
89 Barbara Mitchell and Jon Tinker, Antarctica and its Resources ( London: Earthscan , 1980), 79-79; Deborah Shapley, The Seventh Continent: Antarctica in a Resource Age (Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, Inc., 1985), 150.
90.
90 Peter Gwynne, “Antarctica’s icy assets,” Newsweek (3 October 1977): 93-93 .
91.
91 “Parties to the Antarctic Treaty Meet in London,” Department of State Bulletin (21 November 1977): 739-739 .
92.
92 James N. Barnes, Let’s Save Antarctica! ( Victoria, Australia: Greenhouse , 1982), 26-26.
93.
93 Ibid., 36.
94.
94 “Department of State issues an environmental impact statement on mineral resources,” Antarctic Journal of the United States (December 1982): 6-6 .
95.
95 J. C. Farman et al., “Large losses of total ozone in Antarctica reveal CLOx/Nox interaction,” Nature (16 May): 1985-1985 .
96.
96 Albert Gore in Sharon Roan, Ozone Crisis: The 15-Year Evolution of a Sudden Global Emergency ( New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , 1989), v-v.
97.
97 Cover page, National Geographic (December 1988).
98.
98 Time (2 January 1989): 2.
99.
99 Richard S. Stolarski, “The Antarctic ozone hole,” Scientific American (January 1988): 36-36 ; and Allan Hall, “The World’s Frozen Clean Room,” Business Week (22 January 1990): 73.
100.
100Antarctica, Omnimax Films, 1991.
101.
101 “Nightline in Antarctica,” ABC News Nightline (24 November 1992).
102.
102 James Gleick, “A huge chunk of Antarctica is heading our to sea, at a glacial pace,” The New York Times (9 February 1988): C4-C4.
103.
103 “Antarctica,” Exhibit at the Boston Museum of Science, 1992.
104.
104 “Antarctica: Polar wilderness in peril,” National Geographic World (February 1991): 3-3.
105.
105 John May, The Greenpeace Book of Antarctica: A New View of the Seventh Continent ( New York: Doubleday , 1989), 3-3.
106.
106 Testimony of Greenpeace, Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space, Protecting Antarctica’s Environment,101st cong., 1st sess., 8 September 1989, 179.
107.
107 The Antarctica Project, “Why Should We Protect Antarctica?,” 1992.
108.
108 Paul Larmer, “The great white heap?,” Sierra (March/April 1990): 27-27.
109.
109 Michael D. Lemonick, “Antarctica,” Time (15 January 1990): 56-56, 62-62.
110.
110 “President’s message to Antarctic scientists,” Antarctic Journal of the United States (September 1988): 20-20 .
111.
111 “President’s message to Antarctic scientists,” Antarctic Journal of the United States (June 1990): 3. Although these presidents’ paeans to science and the Antarctic environment seem to grate with their anti-regulatory posture towards the domestic natural environment, their administrations recognized that US Antarctic research—increasingly focused on global environmental issues—reinforced the USA’s strategic position in the southern continent. Those administrations may have also seen Antarctica as a safe issue to use to mitigate environmentalists’ criticism of their administrations. Furthermore, they maintained that Antarctic mineral development and environmental protection were compatible.
112.
112 House Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Organizations, Preserving Antarctica’s Ecosystem, 101st cong., 2nd sess., 2 May and 19 July 1990, 1.
113.
113 Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space, Arctic and Antarctic Ozone Depletion, 101st cong., 1st sess., 23 February 1989, 3.
114.
114 The United States Antarctic Program ( Washington, DC: NSF Division of Polar Programs , 1990), 4-4.
115.
115 “Protection of the Antarctic Environment,” GIST, Washington, DC: State Department Bureau of Public Affairs , May 1990.
116.
116 Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty: Message from the President of the United States ( Washington, DC: US Government Printing House , 1992), iv-iv.
117.
117 Daniel and Sally Grotta, “Antarctica: whose continent is it anyway?,” Popular Science (January 1992): 63-63.
118.
118 Edward Mickleburgh, Beyond the Frozen Sea: Visions of Antarctica ( New York: St. Martin’s Press , 1987), 4-4.
119.
119 Safety in Antarctica: Report of the US Antarctic Safety Review Panel ( Washington, DC: NSF , 1988), I6-I6.
120.
120 May, “Introduction,” The Greenpeace Book of Antarctica, 1989 (cit. no 105).
121.
121 Herman Melville, Moby Dick ( New York: Signet Classics , 1961), 196-196.
