Potential For Future Conflicts
John Keegan and Andrew Wheatcroft, in their 1986 book 'Zones of Conflict: An Atlas of Future Wars', make the point that strategic interests in Antarctica derive from two causes: economic and strategic. Antarctica has great potential economic value, in terms of mineral and oil resources. Strategically, there was continuing concern about keeping the Cape Horn route available for free passage during the Cold War, as, among other things, U.S. aircraft carriers cannot pass through the Panama Canal. The Falkland Islands, Keegan and Wheatcroft go on to say, dominate the Drake Passage, the 'stretch of stormy water separating South America from the Antarctic'. This was a less publicised factor during the Falklands War.
However, with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and increasing competition for fossil fuel resources, the 'economic' rather than the 'strategic' rationale is probably more important in the early twenty-first century.
Read more about this topic: Military Activity In The Antarctic
Famous quotes containing the words potential for, potential, future and/or conflicts:
“The traditional American husband and father had the responsibilities—and the privileges—of playing the role of primary provider. Sharing that role is not easy. To yield exclusive access to the role is to surrender some of the potential for fulfilling the hero fantasy—a fantasy that appeals to us all. The loss is far from trivial.”
—Faye J. Crosby (20th century)
“Silence is as full of potential wisdom and wit as the unhewn marble of great sculpture. The silent bear no witness against themselves.”
—Aldous Huxley (1894–1963)
“As a child is indulged or checked in its early follies, a ground is generally laid for the happiness or misery of the future man.”
—Samuel Richardson (1689–1761)
“The extrovert and introvert, the realist and idealist, the scientist and philosopher, the man who found himself by refinding his life history and the individual who discovered his being in fantasy, these are the differences between Freud and Jung.”
—Robert S. Steele. Freud and Jung: Conflicts of Interpretation, ch. 10, Routledge & Kegan Paul (1982)