| Summary: | This dissertation is a discourse analysis of the documentation of various statesmen and diplomats involved in the negotiation of the Antarctic Treaty of 1959, and the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. Using the concept of language games, we can reconstruct from their documents how policymakers on how these policymakers conceived of Antarctica and outer space, so as to gain a better appreciation of why the treaties take the forms that they do, especially with respect to their provisions on sovereignty. What kind of places, to their minds, were Antarctica and outer space? How do these conceptions translate into their treaty provisions? To the diplomats involved in the negotiations, Antarctica was a barren desert that had no value, other than science. In contrast, outer space was understood as a formidable yet accessible realm that was open to all peoples of Earth. Having elucidated these conceptions, we compare the two treaties to understand why the Antarctic and Outer Space Treaties differ in the matter of sovereignty and preparatory styles. This paper concludes with a discussion on language games and how they relate to international politics. Master of Science (International Relations)
|
|---|