Latest news with #U.N.ConventionontheLawoftheSea
15 hours ago
- Politics
High Seas Treaty gains momentum as 18 new countries pledge support
NICE, France -- Eighteen countries ratified the High Seas Treaty on Monday, bringing the total to 49 — just 11 short of the 60 needed for the ocean agreement to enter into force. The surge in support, occurring during the U.N. Ocean Conference in Nice, France, adds momentum to what could become a historic shift in how the world governs the open ocean. 'The entry into force is within our sight, and I call on all remaining nations to join swiftly,' U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres told reporters Tuesday. 'We do not have a moment to lose.' Here's what the treaty is, why it matters and what happens next. Formally known as the Agreement on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction, the High Seas Treaty is the first legally binding agreement focused on protecting marine biodiversity in international waters. These waters, which are beyond the jurisdiction of any single country, make up nearly two-thirds of the ocean and almost half the surface of the planet. Until now, there has been no comprehensive legal framework to create marine protected areas or enforce conservation on the high seas. Despite their remoteness, the high seas are under growing pressure from overfishing, climate change and the threat of deep-sea mining. Environmental advocates warn that without proper protections, marine ecosystems in international waters face irreversible harm. 'Until now, it has been the wild west on the high seas," said Megan Randles, global political lead for oceans at Greenpeace. "Now we have a chance to properly put protections in place.' The treaty is also essential to achieving the global '30x30' target — an international pledge to protect 30% of the planet's land and sea by 2030. The treaty creates a legal process for countries to establish marine protected areas in the high seas, including rules for destructive activities like deep-sea mining and geo-engineering. It also establishes a framework for technology-sharing, funding mechanisms and scientific collaboration among countries. Crucially, decisions under the treaty will be made multilaterally through conferences of parties (COPs) rather than by individual countries acting alone. Once 60 countries ratify the treaty, a 120-day countdown begins before it officially enters into force. That would unlock the ability to begin designating protected areas in the high seas and put oversight mechanisms into motion. As of Monday evening, 49 countries and the EU had ratified, meaning 11 more are needed to trigger that countdown. Guterres called the pace of progress 'a record,' noting that the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea took 12 years to reach entry into force, while the BBNJ treaty appears poised to do so in just over two. 'I see a momentum and an enthusiasm that was difficult to find in the past,' he said. The first Conference of the Parties (COP1) must take place within one year of the treaty's entry into force. That meeting will lay the groundwork for implementation, including decisions on governance, financing and the creation of key bodies to evaluate marine protection proposals. Environmental groups are pushing to surpass the required 60 ratifications, and to do so quickly – the more countries that ratify, the stronger and more representative the treaty's implementation will be. There's also a deadline: only countries that ratify by COP1 will be eligible to vote on critical decisions that determine how the treaty will operate. 'To reach 60 ratifications would be an absolutely enormous achievement, but for the treaty to be as effective as possible, we need countries from all over the world to engage in its implementation,' said Rebecca Hubbard, director of the High Seas Alliance. 'So the next step will be to go from 60 to global.' The surge in support on Monday has raised hopes that 2025 could mark a turning point for high seas protection. 'We're on the brink of making high seas history,' Hubbard said. ___
Japan Times
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Japan Times
U.N. body warns over Trump's deep-sea mining order
The head of the International Seabed Authority on Wednesday criticized U.S. President Donald Trump's order to fast-track deep-sea mining in the open ocean outside American territorial waters. "No state has the right to unilaterally exploit the mineral resources of the area outside the legal framework established by UNCLOS," ISA head Leticia Carvalho said in a statement, referring to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. "It is common understanding that this prohibition is binding on all States, including those that have not ratified UNCLOS," she added. The United States is not a signatory of the convention, which established the ISA in 1982 and says that international waters and its resources are "the common heritage of humankind." The ISA is scrambling to devise a rulebook for deep-sea mining, balancing its economic potential against warnings of irreversible environmental damage. Washington wants to spearhead mining for mineral-rich nodules in the deepest ocean floor, sidestepping a global effort to regulate such potentially damaging exploration. The Trump administration appears to be relying on an obscure, decades-old law that allows the federal government to issue seabed mining permits in international waters — a move that has sparked international outcry from Paris, Beijing, and beyond. Carvalho said the decision by from the Trump administration was "surprising" given that for more than three decades Washington was a "reliable observer and significant contributor" to ISA work. She said "unilateral action ... sets a dangerous precedent that could destabilize the entire system of global ocean governance," she added. The ISA must both oversee any exploration or mining of coveted resources (such as cobalt, nickel or manganese) in international waters, and protect the marine environment, according to UNCLOS. Carvalho added in her statement that the advantages of adhering to international norms "outweigh the potential risks and challenges associated with unilateral action across the chain, from intergovernmental relations to investment security."
National Observer
30-04-2025
- Business
- National Observer
Canadian company turns to Trump for the green light to mine international waters, bypassing a UN agency
A Canadian company announced Tuesday that its US subsidiary submitted applications to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to mine the seafloor, sparking outrage by bypassing a U.N. agency that regulates deep international waters. The Metals Company said it was seeking two exploration licenses and a commercial recovery permit, marking the first time a company applies to commercially mine the seabed. The filing is expected to spark a complex legal battle since the Jamaica-based International Seabed Authority, a U.N. agency that regulates international deep-sea waters, has the power to authorize exploitation permits. 'Any commercial exploitation outside of national jurisdiction carried out without the authorization of ISA would constitute a violation of international law,' the authority said in late March after The Metals Company announced its intention to seek permission from the US government to start deep-sea mining in international waters. There are currently no regulations in place to oversee such mining as scientists warn that extracting minerals from vital ecosystems that help regulate climate change could cause permanent damage. Filing follows Trump directive The filing comes less than a week after US President Donald Trump issued an executive order that directs the Secretary of Commerce to expedite the review and issuance of exploration and commercial recovery permits, among other things. Canadian company turns to Trump for permission to mine international waters, bypassing a UN agency. #ISA #DeepSeaMining 'With these applications, we are offering the United States a shovel-ready path to new and abundant supplies of nickel, copper, cobalt, and manganese — critical metals for energy, infrastructure and defense,' Gerard Barron, chairman and CEO of The Metals Company, said in a statement. Environmentalists and activists decried the move, saying that ISA has the sole power to authorize exploitation permits. 'This unilateral American effort to carve up the Pacific Ocean already faces fierce international opposition,' said Ruth Ramos, Greenpeace's international senior campaigner. 'Governments around the world must now step up to defend international rules and cooperation against rogue deep-sea mining.' For years, members of the authority's council have debated how and if to allow deep-sea mining. So far, the authority has only issued exploration licenses, with most of the current exploratory activity concentrated in the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, which covers 1.7 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers) between Hawaii and Mexico. At least 17 of 31 licenses have been issued for this zone, with exploration occurring at depths ranging from 13,000 to 19,000 feet (4,000 to 6,000 meters). UN convention ratified by dozens of countries but not US The International Seabed Authority was created in 1994 by the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is ratified by more than 165 nations — but not the United States. The Metals Company has argued that the US seabed mining code would allow it to start operations in international waters, since it's not a member of the authority and therefore not bound by its rules. 'After continuous delay at the international level, the United States now has a clear opportunity to reclaim its leadership role in the deep sea and set a global standard for responsible, science-based deep-seabed resource development,' Barron said. US mining code is no guarantee of a mining permit But Emily Jeffers, senior attorney for the US-based nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity, said it's not a foregone conclusion that the company will be given permission to mine under the US seabed mining code, which requires a full environmental analysis. 'This statute has been on the books for 45 years, and there's a reason why no other companies have used it to extract minerals from the seafloor,' she said in a phone interview. 'The science is clear that companies cannot satisfy the standard demanded by the statute. There's no way to do deep-sea mining without having a significant and catastrophic effect on the environment.' Jeffers said that if the Trump administration approves the permit, it would face legal challenges from environmental organizations. 'Not an experiment we should be conducting' In late March, the Vancouver-based company announced that it would seek permission from the U.S. to start deep-sea mining in international waters to extract minerals used in electric car batteries and other green technology. The announcement was made just hours before the council of the ISA met on the last day of a two-week conference focused on how and whether to allow such mining. Scientists have said that a rush to collect minerals that take millions of years to form could unleash noise, light and smothering dust storms deep in the Earth's oceans. 'Deep-sea mining has the potential to impact not just the seabed environment, but all of the life in between,' said Jeff Watters, external affairs vice president for the US-based nonprofit Ocean Conservancy. 'There are so many mysteries about this part of the ocean where we've just been able to scratch the surface.' He said deep-sea mining is 'not an experiment that we should be conducting.' Watters said in a phone interview that the area The Metals Company is seeking to explore is larger than the size of South Dakota and the extraction area larger than the size of Vermont. 'The size and scale is just huge,' he said. Companies say mining seafloor is cheaper, safer than land Mining companies have said that harvesting minerals from the seafloor instead of from land is cheaper and has less of an environmental impact. A spokesperson for the authority declined comment and referred to statements it made earlier this year. The authority has said that it has the sole legal mandate to regulate mineral-related activities in the international seabed. It noted that the international legal regime established by the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea applies to all states, regardless of whether they are members or not. 'Any endeavor undertaken outside the recognized and consensual international framework, or in an attempt to circumvent international law, may incur legal, diplomatic, economic, security, financial and reputational risks,' the authority said.
San Francisco Chronicle
29-04-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
Canadian company turns to Trump for permission to mine international waters, bypassing a UN agency
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — A Canadian company announced Tuesday that its U.S. subsidiary submitted applications to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to mine the seafloor, sparking outrage by bypassing a U.N. agency that regulates deep international waters. The Metals Company said it was seeking two exploration licenses and a commercial recovery permit, marking the first time a company applies to commercially mine the seabed. The filing is expected to spark a complex legal battle since the Jamaica-based International Seabed Authority, a U.N. agency that regulates international deep-sea waters, has the power to authorize exploitation permits. 'Any commercial exploitation outside of national jurisdiction carried out without the authorization of ISA would constitute a violation of international law,' the authority said in late March after The Metals Company announced its intention to seek permission from the U.S. government to start deep-sea mining in international waters. There are currently no regulations in place to oversee such mining as scientists warn that extracting minerals from vital ecosystems that help regulate climate change could cause permanent damage. Filing follows Trump directive The filing comes less than a week after U.S. President Donald Trump issued an executive order that directs the Secretary of Commerce to expedite the review and issuance of exploration and commercial recovery permits, among other things. 'With these applications, we are offering the United States a shovel-ready path to new and abundant supplies of nickel, copper, cobalt, and manganese — critical metals for energy, infrastructure and defense,' Gerard Barron, chairman and CEO of The Metals Company, said in a statement. Environmentalists and activists decried the move, saying that ISA has the sole power to authorize exploitation permits. 'This unilateral American effort to carve up the Pacific Ocean already faces fierce international opposition,' said Ruth Ramos, Greenpeace's international senior campaigner. 'Governments around the world must now step up to defend international rules and cooperation against rogue deep-sea mining.' For years, members of the authority's council have debated how and if to allow deep-sea mining. So far, the authority has only issued exploration licenses, with most of the current exploratory activity concentrated in the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, which covers 1.7 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers) between Hawaii and Mexico. At least 17 of 31 licenses have been issued for this zone, with exploration occurring at depths ranging from 13,000 to 19,000 feet (4,000 to 6,000 meters). UN convention ratified by dozens of countries but not US The International Seabed Authority was created in 1994 by the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is ratified by more than 165 nations — but not the United States. The Metals Company has argued that the U.S. seabed mining code would allow it to start operations in international waters, since it's not a member of the authority and therefore not bound by its rules. 'After continuous delay at the international level, the United States now has a clear opportunity to reclaim its leadership role in the deep sea and set a global standard for responsible, science-based deep-seabed resource development,' Barron said. U.S. mining code is no guarantee of a mining permit But Emily Jeffers, senior attorney for the U.S.-based nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity, said it's not a foregone conclusion that the company will be given permission to mine under the U.S. seabed mining code, which requires a full environmental analysis. 'This statute has been on the books for 45 years, and there's a reason why no other companies have used it to extract minerals from the seafloor,' she said in a phone interview. 'The science is clear that companies cannot satisfy the standard demanded by the statute. There's no way to do deep-sea mining without having a significant and catastrophic effect on the environment.' Jeffers said that if the Trump administration approves the permit, it would face legal challenges from environmental organizations. 'Not an experiment we should be conducting' In late March, the Vancouver-based company announced that it would seek permission from the U.S. to start deep-sea mining in international waters to extract minerals used in electric car batteries and other green technology. The announcement was made just hours before the council of the ISA met on the last day of a two-week conference focused on how and whether to allow such mining. Scientists have said that a rush to collect minerals that take millions of years to form could unleash noise, light and smothering dust storms deep in the Earth's oceans. 'Deep-sea mining has the potential to impact not just the seabed environment, but all of the life in between,' said Jeff Watters, external affairs vice president for the U.S.-based nonprofit Ocean Conservancy. 'There are so many mysteries about this part of the ocean where we've just been able to scratch the surface.' He said deep-sea mining is 'not an experiment that we should be conducting.' Watters said in a phone interview that the area The Metals Company is seeking to explore is larger than the size of South Dakota and the extraction area larger than the size of Vermont. 'The size and scale is just huge,' he said. Companies say mining seafloor is cheaper, safer than land Mining companies have said that harvesting minerals from the seafloor instead of from land is cheaper and has less of an environmental impact. A spokesperson for the authority declined comment and referred to statements it made earlier this year. The authority has said that it has the sole legal mandate to regulate mineral-related activities in the international seabed. It noted that the international legal regime established by the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea applies to all states, regardless of whether they are members or not. 'Any endeavor undertaken outside the recognized and consensual international framework, or in an attempt to circumvent international law, may incur legal, diplomatic, economic, security, financial and reputational risks,' the authority said.
Scoop
26-04-2025
- Business
- Scoop
US Executive Order Opens Up Deep Sea To Mining, Flouting International Law, Endangering Ocean Health
Press Release – Burness Trump administration order issued in response to trade war with China built on flawed business case; threatens to unleash piracy of ocean floor minerals, experts say. 25 April The U.S. government has issued an executive order enabling U.S. companies and subsidiaries to apply for licenses to mine the deep-sea in international waters under the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resources Act, originally designed to regulate mining activities until the U.S. could formally adopt the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. In response to the order, leading ocean experts issued the following statements: Dr. Douglas McCauley, a professor at UC Santa Barbara and adjunct professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said: 'This executive order is a great gift to China's economy. Up until today, most countries have been sitting around the same table in the International Seabed Authority, carefully negotiating binding mining regulations to ensure the equitable sharing of benefits from resources mined in international waters. The U.S. is attempting to subvert that controlled process. 'The US has stepped forward to become the first pirate mining operation in international waters. With rules, we could have controlled the minerals that China or any country or person would take from this part of the ocean. But without any rules, China, simply put, will be far better at winning. 'For example, these metals at the bottom of the ocean were recently discovered to be radioactive. It is difficult to imagine any community in the US that would want a mountain of these radioactive metals processed in their backyard. Other countries may be less squeamish about such things. 'The grand irony is that we just unleashed a gold rush – but a gold rush for fool's gold. In our fever to get at these ocean minerals – the US seems to have neglected to run the numbers. The cobalt and nickel that could be mined from the ocean floor would be the most expensive cobalt and nickel mined anywhere on the planet. We just committed US taxpayers to something akin to the $400 military hammer scandal. Cobalt and nickel are in oversupply today and can be bought with a click on international metal markets at a fraction of the cost. The US just signed on the dotted line for a very bad economic deal.' Duncan Currie, legal and policy advisor, Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, said: 'The decision by the United States to unilaterally pursue deep-sea mining is a breach of international law with dire consequences for every country and person who benefits from the ocean as our common heritage. It upends more than 40 years of legal precedent in the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, threatens to destabilize ocean governance globally and is an insult to the peoples and countries across the Pacific that this move will most impact.' Victor Vescovo, founder and CEO, Caladan Capital, and retired naval officer, industrial investor and undersea explorer, said: 'Deep Sea Mining is an untried, technically difficult, very expensive, and financially risky experiment to secure only two scarce metals available from seafloor mining, nickel and cobalt, that are no longer essential for making electric vehicle batteries. These two metals can also be secured for national security by other, more reliable and cheaper means, or stockpiling. As for Rare Earth Metals or lithium, neither are available in meaningful quantities from seafloor mining. Pursuit of commercial Deep Sea Mining has a very great probability of becoming the Republican Party's version of the Solyndra embarrassment.' Bobbi-Jo Dobush, ocean conservation policy expert and author of 'Deep Sea Mining Isn't Worth the Risk,' said: 'Deep-sea mining is fundamentally an unproven and high-risk endeavor, beset by significant technical, financial and regulatory uncertainties that carry substantial risk for investors. The Metals Company is promising certainty where none exists.' The experts above are available to discuss why: A rush to mine the deep sea would create economic hardship and geopolitical harm for the U.S. without apparent gains. Experts project deep-seabed mining to be economic folly – generating some of the most expensive cobalt and nickel ever mined on the planet. U.S. action would likely trigger a 'fool's gold' rush to mine the deep sea from competitors such as Russia and China, causing irreparable harm to vulnerable marine ecosystems and ocean health. The release of toxic materials associated with mining represents a risk to public health globally through seafood contamination. Deep-sea mining poses immense risks to marine habitats and ocean biodiversity.
