States Parties to the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War
of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriolog-
ical Methods of Warfare, Done at Geneva June 17, 1925

States which have deposited instruments of ratification or accession, or continue to
be bound as the result of succession agreements concluded by them or by reason of
notification given by them to the Secretary-General of the United Nations:

1 a, b, c, d With reservations to Protocol as follows:

a-binding only as regards relations with other parties.

b-to cease to be binding in regard to any enemy States whose armed forces or allies do not observe provisions.

c-to cease to be binding as regards use of chemical agents with respect to any enemy State whose armed forces or allies do not observe provisions. d-does not constitute recognition of or involve treaty relations with Israel.

2By virtue of agreement with former parent State or notification to the Secretary General of the United Nations of succession to treaty rights and obligations upon independence.

3Applicable to all French territories.

'Applicable to Suriname and Curacao.

"It does not bind India or any British Dominion which is a separate member of the League of Nations and does not separately sign or adhere to the Protocol. It is applicable to all colonies.

"Deposited accession on June 12, 1978, but the French Government asked that accession take effect on date of notification by them-Feb. 19, 1979.

'Included in declaration by France. Continued application has apparently not been determined.

The Antarctic Treaty

The Antarctic Treaty, the earliest of the post-World War II arms limitation agreements, has significance both in itself and as a precedent. It internationalized and demilitarized the Antarctic Continent and provided for its cooperative exploration and future use. It has been cited as an example of nations exercising foresight and working in concert to prevent conflict before it develops. Based on the premise that to exclude armaments is easier than to eliminate or control them once they have been introduced, the treaty served as a model, in its approach and even provisions, for later "nonarmament" treaties-the treaties that excluded nuclear weapons from outer space, from Latin America, and from the seabed.

By the 1950s seven nations-Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom-claimed sovereignty over areas of Antarctica, on the basis of discovery, exploration, or geographic propinquity. Claims of Argentina, Chile, and the United Kingdom overlapped. Eight other nations-the United States, the Soviet Union, Belgium, Germany, Poland, Sweden, Japan, and South Africa-had engaged in exploration but had put forward no specific claims. The United States did not recognize the claims of other governments and reserved the right to assert claims based on exploration by its citizens. The Soviet Union took a similar position.

Activities in the Antarctic had generally been conducted peacefully and cooperatively. Yet the possibility that exploitable economic resources might be found meant the possibility of future rivalry for their control. Moreover, isolated and uninhabited, the continent might at some time become a potential site for emplacing nuclear weapons.

Fortunately, scientific interests rather than political, economic, or military concerns dominated the expeditions sent to Antarctica after World War II. Fortunately, too, international scientific associations were able to work out arrangements for effective cooperation. In 1956 and 1957, for example, American meteorologists "wintered over" at the Soviet post, Mirnyy, while Soviet meteorologists "wintered over" at Little America. These cooperative activities culminated in the International Geophysical Year of 1957-1958 (IGY), a joint scientific effort by 12 nations-Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States-to conduct studies of the Earth and its cosmic environment.