High Seas Treaty gains momentum as 18 new countries pledge support
Here's what the treaty is, why it matters and what happens next.
What is the High Seas Treaty
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.
Why is it needed
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.
How the treaty works
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.
What happens when it reaches 60 ratifications
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.
What comes after ratification
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.
___
Follow Annika Hammerschlag on Instagram @ahammergram
___
The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP's environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
EU-US Trade Talks Focus on Tariff Offset for Automakers
By and Jorge Valero Updated on Save Some European Union carmakers and capitals are pushing for an agreement with President Donald Trump that would allow for tariff relief in return for increasing investment in the US, according to people familiar with the matter. Member states were briefed on the status of trade negotiations on Friday after a round of talks in Washington this week and were told that a technical agreement in principle was close, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.


New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Immigrants' deportation to South Sudan briefly blocked after Supreme Court cleared the way
A federal judge on Friday briefly halted deportations of eight immigrants to war-torn South Sudan, sending the case to another judge, in Boston, the day after the Supreme Court greenlighted their removal. District Judge Randolph Moss sent the case north from Washington after an extraordinary Fourth of July hearing on Friday afternoon. He concluded that the judge best equipped to deal with the issues was Brian Murphy, the one whose rulings led to the initial halt of the Trump administration's effort to begin deportations to the eastern African country. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled on Friday to halt the deportations of eight migrants to South Sudan. AP He extended his order halting the deportation until 4:30 p.m. Eastern time, but it was unclear whether Murphy would act on the federal holiday to further limit the removal. Moss said new claims by the immigrants' lawyers deserved a hearing. The administration has been trying to deport the immigrants for weeks. None are from South Sudan, which is enmeshed in civil war and where the U.S government advises no one should travel before making their own funeral arrangements. The case has been sent to another judge after the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration could deport the eight immigrants convicted of violent crimes back to South Sudan. AP The government flew them to the U.S. Naval Base at Djibouti but couldn't move them further because Murphy had ruled no immigrant could be sent to a new country without a chance to have a court hearing. The Supreme Court vacated that decision last month, then Thursday night issued a new order clarifying that that meant the immigrants could be moved to South Sudan. Lawyers for the immigrants, who hail from Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and other countries, filed an emergency request to halt their removal later that night.


The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Europe's human rights watchdog concerned over use of force against Serbia anti-corruption protesters
BELGRADE, Serbia (AP) — Europe's human rights watchdog Friday expressed concern that Serbian authorities were using excessive force and arbitrary detentions to break up street protests against the populist government of President Aleksandar Vucic. Michael O'Flaherty, the Council of Europe's commissioner for human rights, said in a statement that 'freedom of assembly and freedom of expression are key human rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and it is Serbia's duty to guarantee them.' 'I am concerned about the current human rights situation in Serbia, where, despite the assurances I received from the authorities during my visit in April, excessive use of force is being applied to curb demonstrations,' O'Flaherty said. Amnesty International and Civil Rights Defenders urged restraint and an investigation into any use of unlawful force. 'Footage of Serbian riot police indiscriminately targeting peaceful protesters gathered at blockades on the street and in front of universities in Belgrade are alarming,' the rights groups said in a joint statement on Friday. 'A heavy-handed response to peaceful dissent cannot be justified.' Riot police have detained scores of demonstrators since a major rally last weekend, including university students, their professors and others, who have been blocking traffic throughout the country demanding an early parliamentary election. Tensions have soared since the rally last weekend by tens of thousands of people in Belgrade which ended with clashes between riot police and groups of protesters. Monthslong demonstrations previously had been largely calm. Police also intervened on Friday to clear traffic blockades in Belgrade, briefly detaining a number of protesters. Defiant demonstrators protesters returned to jam the streets on Friday evening. University students behind the protests have said that police have injured many peaceful demonstrators in the past several days. Witnesses told local media that riot police beat up protesters with batons and shields, and that four students were hospitalized early Thursday, including one with a broken clavicle. Police have denied the use of excessive force, warning that blocking traffic is illegal. Vucic has described ongoing protests as 'terror' and an attempt to bring down the state. O'Flaherty's statement said that 'increased levels of the use of force by the police as well as arbitrary arrests and detention have occurred during the week.' 'I am particularly concerned about the arrest of children, as well as the number of students being charged for criminal offenses or hospitalized for the treatment of injuries,' O'Flaherty said in a statement. He added that 'mischaracterization of this largely peaceful student-led movement should be avoided at all costs.' Both the European Union mission in Serbia and the U.N. Human Rights Office said Thursday that they were watching the situation closely and urged restraint. Persistent protests that have rattled Vucic first started in November after a renovated train station canopy collapsed in Serbia's north, killing 16 people. Many in Serbia blame the tragedy on alleged corruption-fueled negligence in state infrastructure projects. Critics say Vucic has become increasingly authoritarian since coming to power more than a decade ago, stifling democratic freedoms while allowing corruption and organized crime to flourish, which he has denied. Serbia is formally seeking entry to the EU, but Vucic's government has nourished relations with Russia and China.