to many fish to die in this river, it has to be said that on the german side of the order, there are some voices asking questions about the speed and the size of the operation on the polish side of the border. to find out what caused these deaths, it seems the polish government has heard those voices. the heads of poland, water authority, and environment inspector its have been sacked the view in warsaw or is that someone may have deliberately put a toxic substance into the river, which is why a reward of more than 2 $100000.00 has been offered for help in finding who did this dominate cane al jazeera on the order river. ah hello, are you watching out 0 these the headlines this al a kenya's vice president william berto has been declared the winner of the country's presidential election. he received just over 50 percent,

devised less than 2 percent ahead of his arrival, former prime minister rolla a dinner. i am a vague, proud canyon this evening that the people of kenya have raised the bar on us who are thinking leadership in our country. not to celebrate the new cities, but to settle our programs. our manifesto, our agenda, and our plan. we do not have been luxury to point fingers. we do not have the luxury to apportion blame. we must close ranks and walk together for a functioning democratic process. beth ken the announcement was delayed because of scuffles inside the vote. counting center

after 4 of the 7 members of the electoral commission refused to endorse the result . that field phase of further violence and allegations of vote rigging is been 12 months since the taliban took control of afghanistan. millions lived deeper in poverty with calls the more un funding to prevent masturbation in this winter and is rally. soldier has been killed and several others wounded in a so called friendly fire incident. the shooting took place in the village of to come in the occupied west bank. and israel forces initially reported there was shot at by palestinian gunmen and stormed to come in search of attack is the un says it can support a visit by international atomic energy agency to ukraine separation nuclear power plant. if both russia and ukraine grain, the 2 countries accuse each other of shelling the facility, all right, those are the headlines. i'm emily and gwen state you now

a inside story. ah, a global treaty for the high seas. you and member states trying to agree a deal to protect fragile ecosystems and international waters. why is it important and what has prevented an agreement until now? this is inside story. ah. hello and welcome to the program. i'm laura kyle. countries have tried for years to reach a global agreement on protecting the high seas. these are areas of the world's oceans

that full beyond the jurisdiction of any one nation. each country has exclusive use of its territorial waters which one up to 370 kilometers from the shorelines. those territorial areas are highlighted in light blue on this map. beyond that and dark blue of the high seas, international waters that make up most of our planets, oceans, scientists say existing laws aren't strong enough to protect those areas. well, the high seas are crucial for supporting marine life, as well as absorbing carbon dioxide and heat caused by global warming. un member states meeting in new york to try to agree on a legally binding treaty. they've been negotiating for the past 10 years. let's look at why it's so relevant. 2 thirds of the world's ocean are considered international waters. that means all countries have a right to fish ship and carry out research in them. but only 1.2 percent of these

high seas are protected. this means most of the world's marine life is exposed to growing threats from climate change over fishing and shipping. if countries commit to the treaty, 30 percent of the world's oceans would be considered conservative conservation areas by 2013. that means that environmental impact assessments will have to be carried out before any commercial activities such as deep sea mining are allowed. well see you and oceans conference in june. secondly, general antenna, good terrorists had some governments were deliberately stalling progress on a treaty egoism. we are dealing with the protection of firm barrow over of sooty in international waters. but some people still sing that they are powerful enough to suit the evidence. russell walker's should be this. i think it's important to work. everybody

understands that international or waters are hours of all countries and all people's hulu. let's bring in august now in new york. we have jessica battle senior experts on global ocean policy at the world wildlife fund in london, danesh mustafah, professor of critical geography at kings college, london, and also a new york, well mccollum, head of oceans at green piece you came when there's also had a green piece is delegation to the un in new york. i will welcome to all of you. first, i think it's important to address the facts that we're talking about. half of our planet left currently unprotected. it's an incredible amount. well, why is it so important to change that? it's so important to change the status quo because when we're seeing the threats, the ocean only increasing would seem like over fishing,

like illegal to sing like deep sea mining all continue to increase and very little actual actually protect the bio diversity out there on the oceans. and i suppose for people sitting on lamps, they might wonder why, why does ocean protect matter to me and, and say, well, all of us depend on a healthy ocean to help regulate climate, to absorb carbon, to keep us more resilient, the impacts of climate change. but also more than 3000000000 people around the world depend on the ocean for their primary source of food. so, risking that food security through political action simply isn't good enough. and that's why we're here at the united nation, this week campaign for a strong treaty to be agree with study, talk more about that treaty and just a moment on it's just before we do, i mean, this is a part of the world, but not many of us get to see, let's be honest, who does go out what sort of activities do we see out on these high seas? well,

they are very few countries in the world that actually have the capability to undertake the mining. it used to be the united states was the only country out of the $990.00 capacity to walk in the high season. the mining maybe japan right now has developed that sort of ability, maybe a couple of other countries. but united states continues to be the largest player in the game when it comes to see mining. in fact, bradley, the only place that is out there. so when you're really talking about regulation of the high seas, what you're really talking about is a handful of stream the bar countries united states being at the forefront. so the question of regulating deep sea mining is probably intricately connected to domestic politics with united states with it because politically feasible for an administration to forego and almost exclusive capability that they have to undertake the grant effective would be that is trying to regulate. i mean,

was them beat or south africa, or pakistan or dish will happily signed the treaty because don't have the ability to go out there. and i see, and i did take the kind of mining activities when it comes to deep c fisheries. again, the handful of countries that actually have the factory boats which have that sort of rage to undertake deep sea blue waters fishing chief amongst them would be again, united states, canada, norway, iceland, japan, taiwan, korea, and then maybe a few others that the other participants are gonna be mindful of and know off. so again, this treaty really is about a handful of countries that can actually do something in the high seats. so you see there was a, there was a reference in the, in the, in the chip that you ran earlier at the bottom from enough, not what you bought, the risk. well well let's name the bar for once, right?

don't think that it belongs to the rest of the we're going to get to it. i'm going to bring you in at this point because quite quickly we done is hones us in from a global tracy to just a handful of perpetrators. so, why don't we just make this a domestic issue and, and hone in on these, these few powerful countries? why does it have to involve the whole whole world? well, because they united nation, the law of this, the treaty, which is the one on the which this treat the thing negotiated, actually has a $165.00 parties. i think it's a, it's a pretty global treaty. us, you said in your introduction the highest it belongs to everyone. we cannot allow only a few countries to exploit these last areas that have so many benefits for so many people are so many countries economy as well. so that it's very, very important that almost all these countries to come, if not all,

become parties. members, to this treat that when they finalize, so that everybody is covered by an all activities covered by it. we believe, and this is also what the good paris said, the 2nd general, the united nations, in the clear in the beginning that the ocean beyond national jurisdiction is really the lodge, the law tragedy of the commons. i say it really is somewhere where those who can have been exploiting it to the benefit for them, but really at the detriment of all of us and all of our children's future as well. so even though it's, of course, only a few companies, this is they have the ability to go out there. and what they do is that they subsidize, for example, their highest efficiently, tremendously expensive to operate on the high seas. and they, they catch too much fish. they destroy employ than a habitat living space for many,

many creatures. and they will capture a lot of important spacious in bycatch. iconic spaces that we have cultural or other values to like large waves, for example, titles. so really yes, the, it's a few country who have activities there, but it's all of ours interest and responsibility. and, well, we know that countries like australia, new zealand, but the e u. r in favor of this treaty was about places like america, japan, a veil board with it over the last round of negotiations took place in march. we saw that many, if not most countries were in favor of concluding a treaty. the question is really, how strong will that treaty be in for us, the pieces environmental campaign as an i'm sure i share this with others on the call for the success of this treaty and its strength will be determined on whether

or not the power to protect areas of the high seas kind of actually put areas on the high seas, off limits to some of these destructive industries we be mentioning. if it can do that, then we'll consider a strong treaty and it remains to be seen how hard the e you in particular are willing to push, but it's really worried at the moment i'm entering into negotiations and quite it attends play is wondering how will countries that previous to being supportive, be willing to compromise, because we desperately need a strong treat to treat you can actually deliver ocean protection. the u. k. government, for example, along many of the been traveling around the welcome painting for at least 30 percent of the world's oceans. to be protected by 2030, that's well scientific as needed to restore populations key persons more resilient to climate change. now that target is simply impossible without a strong treaty. we won't get it on that scale. and if we don't agree a treaty this year, it also isn't possible to protect 30 central oceans by 2030. so the agency is what

we really need to see these negotiations. the urgency willingness and donnas also we, we need to know how we can protect these oceans. we're talking about places that are very and hospitable that are very inaccessible. how do we actually police these high seas again, just to just to get back to my earlier point of very few countries in the world have the capability to enforce, right? the same countries that have the capability to go out there and undertake dc mining or subsidize their iep, c fishing, please. otherwise we'll have the capability to police those. so it's a, it's a, it's an interesting situation, but the traders are also the ones which we are also asking to release their behavior. so you can get your creepy and if the united states doesn't sign it, it doesn't. it's not what the people that it's written on you can get your i mean

it's kind of climate change as well. right. i'm trying to change the lot. busy political attraction in the european union even, you know, to an extent, you could argue in the states, it's in the i. but high seas is something that, that's very far away from the public punches. and maybe few people go out there. but if people get excited about it, and i think that that's, that's the sort of paradox of the problem that you have at your hands. so you, when can do what it wants and you know, 165 try and 164 countries, fine. it doesn't sign it what you have a treaty, but so what i mean the, the main country that can actually do something about it or is in fact, the problem doesn't sign it. so that's end of discussion that's fixing. let's have a climate change treaty, but not to have dry now or us part of it. well, that becomes meaningless. ok, i can think of what's your response to that? i mean, as he was saying, no, you can get everybody's signing it. but how are we actually going to police and

will the us be willing to police itself? i mean, it's valid points, isn't it? and what's the response to that? i don't think we should focus too much of the united states because they're not state specially not a part of the law of the sea convention understand, behaves according to the law. say convention. i think what is really important here is if we heard that the state to a part is to this treaty, they are, they are obliged to also make sure that the flag, the vessels that they flag and will activate on the highest it's taking place on some vessels on vessels off to the fishing potential. they've been mining shipping, of course, k belaying. don't forget, other potential and current use of the ocean or taking place from, from the vessel from boats. and these both have a flag and if that is the flag space that is responsible for the behavior over these vessels and the hood need to police this. so if the read is this treat the

we're hoping can foster the collaboration between this flag say and who are signatories to a whole host of other agreements. but they also have to implement when they're, when they're invest sosa vessels and they flag or bracing on the highest is let's not forget, forget other, treat this such as the commercial market or specious. that was set up to protect animals that, that migrate the cross jurisdictional from the highest is to national horses, etc. and we have a lot of fish with some fish spacious in their 1st of the sector. that is one of those of the, the, the flex they also have to make sure are followed. and what we're hoping with this treat is to establish this strong collaborative mechanism and also a sense of, of duty to report what is going on. how are they doing when they're implementing the history? so for example, if we were saying if this is suspected area that has been established on the tracy,

that these flag states are controlling the vessels that they flag in such a, a of that do not break that law. well, still it's going to run up against some big, powerful interest, isn't it? let's look at deep sea mining. for example, no license, it doesn't happen as yet. but explain exploratory licenses. have been released. how much concern does this raise for you? because people are going to want to explore the deep sea as resources on land run, finn, and as we want to develop renewable energy, we're already finding sources, minerals under the sea that can contribute to that. so there's a conundrum there in itself. how. how does this argument play out quickly on deep sea mining, i think frankly there is absolutely no need for deep sea mining. the big tech companies, the big companies who might need these minerals. they're not calling for the money

. they're actually looking at time to materials mining is being pushed forward by a tiny number of companies who desperately want to to find a new frontier to expose. so it is a concern for us absolutely. that it's being talked about seriously. but really, i think the other obstacles is treat faces and so how up to mystic i am, you know, no one said, deciding that the say to half of our planet is going to be a simple task. it is wrong with complex t m and difficulty. but it's also the most enormous opportunity, and i have a lot of hope going into the next 2 weeks because the science is so clear that when you protect the ocean property, when you, when you put areas of limits to human activities, when you limit the more destructive industries out that it have this remarkable ability to bounce back to restore like sort of scale that you just don't see on

land. and that vision of how i did that, that, that protecting it will, will all read the reward property. protecting it, i hope is what will drive some governments to really push the most ambitious treaty . they will love your optimism and i want to share it, but it's been 10 years of negotiations. what makes you think that this is the year? it's going to be agreed. so some very powerful countries in the room right now are saying this is the we see within the he, you come out a lot saying we have to see a treaty. we're seeing other negotiating groups like the pacific small island developing states like africa, also saying this year, the ultimate, the governments don't want to be sending delegation to new york year in year out to debate the future. they want, they want to see a result. but it is very disappointing to see ministers from most companies here that would really send the signal is a political priority. so if the in the 1st few days we're seeing these talks are replicating, the same cumbersome, bureaucratic processes as before,

then absolutely going to be writing to minutes as well. so you have to get him out . you have to come here and make your voice how to make delegations know that this is a political priority. to conclude, it isn't easy. of course it's not easy. $165.00 countries agreeing and the thing is easy, but we do believe that we play an all of this for many years. and governments here are really ready to agree they want this. i'm just wondering, well whether you find that it's already been watered down because we have a graphic we can show you greenpeace. from the university of york released a study in 2019 on how the oceans could be protected by 2013. the areas in orange show the high seas that a protected now. and as we said earlier, it's about one percent. and this is what 30 percent would look like that fee amount, but we're focusing on i say it is possible to safeguard a full spectrum of marine life without disrupting fishing and commercial activities

. now that 30 percent it was brought down from 15 percent. donna, do you think 30 percent is always never enough. is it but is it ok? is it viable? is it possible at this stage of the game i'm? i'm no technical expert on fisheries, and i can't really argue where the 30 percent of 35 percent or 25 percent. what is a good number for that important problem i'm trying to and i'm not against the treaty or refugees, a wonderful happens and i hope that optimism is well placed and it does come to my view is, for example, as it was just mentioned by one of the participants to give me up. i'm not interested remembering names that flag ships are the country the flagship, are responsible for the behavior of those vessels. now the idea of us majority and i'm happy to be connected in time, misinformed them to some last majority of the high seas,

official fleets. i'd actually like by beauty and panama and the small countries out there, which are basically fact convenience. which basically means that there are live video is not going to go out there and the police a pushing cronner in the pacific and modified behavior. the other important point that has just been raised is that the law of the seas not subscribed to by the united states again. well didn't, is your answer of countries that have the capability to actually have high seas fishing. try those fishing, please. the countries that have d, c, mining may very well be a very minor part of the picture at the moment in the future. what happens? i don't know those that again, problems of these major countries. and i think that i can, i can understand why colleagues are hesitant to name names or to focus on any one country or the other country. but that's not going to change the reality of the

incredible power that a few countries have to create a problem. and then to control the problem without those, i mean, no one said that synagogue is a problem. no one said that south africa is the problem that, i mean, what does that mean? what is it high? see? there's a very small for characters. and unless we focus on those, you know, bias declarations that belongs to on a, okay. i just wanted to jump in, just jump in. yeah, i was just going to say, yes, it is a small number of countries that are creating the problems, but it is more countries who are feeling the impacts. and that is why we need these multi not for processes is to help those countries who might not have a diplomatic power as a single entity by creating these multi foresee to that, that really deliver a common good so, well, that might not be some individual countries creating problems on the united states

street. but countries like spain, you have one of the largest high seas fishing fleets who have been lobbying the european union for a week position on issues they will be and they will stick to the same goes for france. you also have a very large international tune of fleet. they will be bound by and so there are many countries that are active on the high seas who will be bound by this treaty and also huge trading block type europe and union can. in fact, through trade agreements, keep other countries to the hands of these treaties to the rules of these treaties . so whether or not a country ratified that there are so other mechanisms by which countries one things joining jump in as well. yes, the thank you. thank you will without i think what, what we have to remember here. so this tree is not being negotiated in isolation. there are pointed out there are other trees is that a lot of agreements governments have signed onto because they have understood that we have a planet,

but it's ailing. and we need to do something about the way we treat this planet. these are the sustainable development goals, for example. now this is not legally binding, but they are aspiration of the international community to make sure that all states either reduce the consumption because they consume too much or are able to partake in a sustainable development in, in, in that is sustainably getting the resources we have to our disposal without further, if they're seeing the marine marine, the natural environment, launch the thing we must remember that these commitments that these countries have also signed up to. and we have to hold them accountable, which is why we need to make sure we were saying that there's more political ways more political attention to this treaty at this time. just because they've got a deadline at the end of this year to reach an agreement on this treaty, what happens if it's not reached?

if it is not rich, they will have to. they will have to have another go station session, but it's not, not an impossibility, but of course, during this time the ocean is continues to deteriorate. so we do not want to see a whole slew of, of more sessions. and we would like them to conclude this treaty at this time. but if there are a few small issues still to resolve, then yes, another session might be needed. but us that we can't wait the ocean conway. absolutely. ok. we will have to leave at that for the moment, watching the next few days of this convention very closely in the thanks very much for taking the time to join us, jessica, battle tanisha and stuff. and we'll mccallum and thank you to for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website this al jazeera dot com. and if i discussion will facebook page, that's facebook dot com forward slash a inside story. you can also join the conversation on twitter

a j inside story from me, nora kyle, and the whole team here. the news ah and a abandoned by the state social collectives are occupying spaces among the people, a militant architect working on the edge of the law. in the 1st episode of rabble architecture from viagra, seattle, heather george al jazeera into the realm of self building. insane

gorilla architect on our 0 examining the impact of today's headlines is that both hard liners. what then happens? setting the agenda for tomorrow's discussions. i would likely is that, that ukraine is actually going to get the rebuilding support that it, me international filmmakers and war class journalists, bring programs to inspire protector, catholic government. i all think i can return to my life any more thought is eroding some of its most prize freedom on al jazeera, a 3 year investigation into the pro gun lobby. you've been in a really kind referral. revealeth secrets me want to point put messaging out there will get people out, race get mad and connections some don't want to expose many in legacy media.

love, mass shooty doc mix with my al jazeera investigations. how to sell massacre on al jazeera. i will cover all of latin america for most of my we are, but no country is alike, and it's my job to shed light on how and why lou . hello, i am emily anglin, in our doe hi headquarters. these are the top stories on al jazeera kenya's deputy leader william router has been declared the next president. almost a week after the vote router fought a tight race against a veteran opposition laid at riley or dingo. catherine saw reports from nairobi. it was a week of intrigue and anxiety as canyons waited for the presidential results to be announced.