Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, United Nations and General International Matters, Volume XI

327. Memorandum From the Director of the National Security Council Secretariat (Boggs) to the National Security Council Planning Board¹

Washington, April 29, 1957.

SUBJECT

• Antarctica

REFERENCES

• A. NSC 5424/1
• B. Memo for NSC from Mr. Cutler, April 26, 1957

The enclosed comments on Antarctica, prepared pursuant to Planning Board request on April 22, are transmitted herewith for the information of the Planning Board and for appropriate use in connection with briefings for the Council meeting of May 2, 1957.

The enclosures consist of:

(1) Comments by the Director, National Science Foundation.

(2) Comments by the Department of the Interior ad hoc representative on the Planning Board.

(3) Comments by Admiral Dufek, USN (transmitted by the Defense Member of the Planning Board).

Marion W. Boggs²

[Enclosure 1]

ANTARCTICA

Comments by the Director, National Science Foundation

From the standpoint of basic research in science, the special interest in Antarctica lies generally in the field of the geophysical sciences; and these are now largely covered in the International Geophysical Year program. The area is unique, of course, in its location and size and, scientifically, because a polar region with the possibility of stable observation stations provides opportunities for scientific observations on phenomena which are intensified or confined to the region. For example, radio interference has its maximum intensity in the polar regions where the causes of the interference seem to be most pronounced. Also, there is evidence that the enormous mass of cold air over this large continent is a breeding ground for storms. Until we know the results of the basic research being carried out during the International Geophysical Year, one can hardly forecast what special fields will turn out to be of great importance. However, it is reasonably certain that considerable progress in improvement of weather forecasting, even in the Northern Hemisphere, will depend upon meteorological observations in Antarctica. Also, better understanding of the causes of radio noise (static) and radio communication blackout and of how to avoid them is practically certain.

The essential point is that at present, continuing observations in this area would be in the national interest from the standpoint of science, defense, and general welfare. In order to place basic research in proper perspective with respect to other scientific and non-scientific U.S. interests, it may be stated that after the International Geophysical Year, the value of basic research alone would not at present appear to justify the logistic costs. However, the value of mission-related research, observation, and scientific or technical activity is determined by specific ends to be achieved. In the case of weather forecasting and improved communications, this value is undoubtedly high; other activities such as economic resource evaluation may also be determined to be important. Finally, we assume there are national interests in maintaining U.S. activity based on considerations which are entirely unrelated to science.

The U.S. should certainly not wish to be denied the right to conduct observations in the Antarctica, especially in the fields of meteorology and radio communication. Because of the effort and expense involved, the best way to secure the desired information would be by setting up a network of observing stations in cooperation with other nations. With the establishment of such a network of stations corresponding approximately to the current International Geophysical Year network but not necessarily so extensive, it would be possible at minimum cost to conduct further scientific research, both basic and applied, and provide bases for other technical activities of an operational nature, to the extent deemed desirable to further the missions of various government agencies and to further broad U.S. aims.

Alan T. Waterman³

[Enclosure 2]

ANTARCTICA

Comments by the Department of the Interior Ad Hoc Representative on the Planning Board

1. There is very little known about the Antarctica area from a biological point of view. Evidences of large quantities of fish, whales, bird life, and plankton indicate that there may be rich resources of marine and aquatic life concerning which the United States should be better informed. It would be desirable in the public interest to explore the area and develop a greater knowledge of conditions affecting biological life in the region. It is possible that certain conditions in the area exert substantial influences on the movement of fish throughout the world and are therefore of concern to the U.S. fishing industry.

2. Practically nothing is known about the mineral resources of Antarctica. It is possible that the Palmer Peninsula may contain mineralized zones since it would appear to be an extension of the South American Continent. It is possible that Antarctica may contain some minerals which would be useful to the United States, but to date no work at all has been done on the geology of the area. It is desirable to reduce to topographic maps the information gathered to date and formulate a program to explore the geology of the continent.

3. Consideration should be given now to establishing a program to process the information which will flow to the United States as a result of the studies being made during the IGY.

4. Because so little information is presently available to the United States it would not appear to be wise to assert a claim to any area, if we have a choice in claiming areas, because we would be possibly claiming areas which are utterly worthless. It would seem to be reasonable to process claims in areas that hold future potential value, if possible.

5. It is suggested that no affirmative action would be taken at this time which might upset the orderly progression of the programs outlined by the various governments for the IGY. The United States will gain more by free interchange of information collected by all nations participating in IGY than it would collect if this relationship were impaired by overt and unnecessary action at this time. It is understood, of course, that security and political considerations may be overriding. With respect to these considerations the Department has no comment.

6. It is respectfully recommended that no action be taken to process United States claims until after IGY, and that primary consideration be given to accelerating our scientific research in the area before definitive action is taken on claiming any portion of it in the future.

John G. Liebert⁴

[Enclosure 3]

ANTARCTICA

Comments by Admiral Dufek (Extract from letter by Admiral Dufek to Office of the Secretary of Defense)

Following are some aspects that should be considered in assessing the value of Antarctica:

I—Value of Antarctica

The value of Antarctica can be assessed in three categories:

1. Economic.

a. At the present time Antarctica has no practical commercial value other than in the surrounding oceans such as whaling, sea food, plankton, etc. The United States cannot profitably participate in whaling due to restrictive legislation in this country to protect the domestic animal and fat industries.

b. At the present time the extent of its mineral wealth is not known. Geologists agree that this continent contains the greatest coal deposits in the world. Various explorers have found traces of gold, iron, tin, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silver, sulphur and titanium. However, the present tremendous difficulties and cost of transportation to establish and operate bases in the Antarctic prohibit profitable mining operations. However—this is a vast continent. Less than two-tenths of one per cent of this continent has been surveyed geologically. Nuclear power in the future could possibly make mining profitable if rich mineral deposits were discovered.

2. Strategic value.

a. Antarctica has had no strategic importance in past wars. However, it has been found possible to conduct nearly all types of military operations in Antarctica. Should the Panama and Suez canals be destroyed—the waterways connecting the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans in the Southern Hemisphere would assume great importance.

b. Polar bases are of tremendous value for weather predicting for military operations.

c. Studies of weather, magnetism, cosmic rays and the ionosphere will have a bearing on control of rockets, guided missiles and space ships.

3. Scientific value.

a. The results of the scientific program will have a tremendous impact on mankind. The value of weather prediction and control is self-evident. Other results will become evident as the IGY progresses.

II—Some aspects of the timing of claims to Antarctica

1. At the present time complete harmony exists between the nations (including Russia) having scientific stations in the Antarctic. An announcement of claims at this time would probably handicap the IGY.

2. We do not know which areas of Antarctica contain valuable mineral deposits and which do not. Claiming certain areas, and relinquishing claims to other areas may result in loss to valuable assets.

3. At the present time the Russians are contained in one area south of Australia. The Australian government has expressed concern about this. However, an announcement of claims by the Free Countries might cause the Russians to extend their operations in other areas. They have some basis for claims in the Palmer Peninsula because of the past operations of Admiral Bellingshausen in that area.

4. It is believed that claiming the entire Antarctic by the Free Nations would not cause the Russians to move out.

George Dufek⁵

1. Source: Department of State, S/S–NSC Files: Lot 63 D 351, NSC 5424 Series, Memoranda. Secret.
2. Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.
3. Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.
4. Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.
5. Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.