US Accelerates Deep-Sea Mining Bid to Counter China’s Critical Minerals Dominance
Yirong Han | 15 May 2025
Summary
United States (US) President Donald Trump’s executive order fast-tracks deep-sea mining to access critical minerals and counter China’s influence.
The initiative secures supply chains but guarantees the undermining of international environmental standards.
This unilateral approach will likely intensify geopolitical tensions and fuel global environmental opposition.
On 24 April 2025, Trump issued an executive order to accelerate deep-sea mining, bypassing the UN-led International Seabed Authority (ISA). The Clarion-Clipperton Zone between North America and Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean is abundantly filled with targeted minerals, including nickel, cobalt, copper, and rare earths. Vital for electric vehicles, renewable energy, smartphones and defence applications - obtaining them underscores their strategic significance. While supporters claim this to diversify supply chains and lessen environmental impacts compared to terrestrial mining, critics warn the technology is unproven and will irreparably damage fragile ecosystems. This decision signals a fundamental shift in US resource strategy, prioritising short-term economic gains over long-term sustainability.
This action defies global efforts to regulate seabed mining through multilateral treaties. The ISA, established under UNCLOS (which the US has not ratified), has been developing standards for responsible extraction. By bypassing this process, the US seeks to expedite permits and bolster its domestic industry, risking environmental and regional conflicts. Ignoring these treaties weakens multilateral cooperation and heightens conflicts over ocean sovereignty, especially given opposition from China, Russia, and European countries. This demonstrates a clear pattern of prioritising resource extraction at the expense of international cooperation and environmental protection. The US decision not to ratify UNCLOS, coupled with this executive order, further isolates the nation from established international norms and creates a legal vacuum for its deep-sea mining activities.
China dominates approximately 60% of global rare earth production and controls significant seabed mineral deposits. Its 2010 temporary halt of rare earth exports to Japan during a territorial dispute, and its recent restrictions on exports of six critical minerals to the US amid trade tensions, demonstrate its geopolitical leverage. Importantly, it underscores China’s ability to disrupt key defence industry supply chains, posing a significant security challenge. The US administration contends this dominance as justification for the executive order, arguing that diversifying supply chains is essential for national security.
The Metals Company, a US and Canada-based deep-sea mining exploration firm, emerged as the most immediate beneficiary of the executive order, with its shares rising approximately 40% following the announcement. The firm, specialising in deep-sea mining, has already conducted pilot operations and developed advanced nodule collection technology. However, these advancements have drawn criticism from over 40 countries, including China, Russia, and Britain, highlighting the contentious nature of seabed exploitation. Norway, previously considering seabed mining, has now aligned with China, India and Poland, supporting slower regulation. These realignments will affect existing frameworks, changing the high seas into a contested zone. The lack of clear regulations and enforcement raises the risk of naval confrontations and seabed militarisation as nations compete for resources. New coalitions against US efforts will inevitably fragment existing regional security efforts.
This executive order reflects a broader trend of unilateralism, mirroring the US withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and attempts to pressure Ukraine to hand over rare earth minerals valued at up to USD 500 b. The order also places strain on relationships with key allies, like Japan, who rely on multilateral treaties for oceanic stability. This challenge for resources exacerbates existing tensions in the South China Sea, where China has been asserting its claims. This convergence of factors underscores the growing fragility of the international order, the increasing risk of conflict over scarce resources and a potential shift away from shared governance and international law.
Zemgale/Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY SA 4.0
Forecast
Short-term (Now - 3 months)
Specifically, there is likely to be increased naval activity within a 200-nautical-mile radius of known polymetallic nodule fields around the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
Driven by the US dismissal of UN processes, a global coalition of environmental organisations will likely intensify its campaign against deep-sea mining, targeting US-based companies and investors. This alliance will likely leverage social media and direct action to pressure the US government and private sector, potentially raising the costs and risks associated with US deep-sea mining ventures.
Medium-term (3-12 months)
Geopolitical tensions are highly likely to escalate over seabed resource control, as China, Russia, and European nations actively counter US efforts. This will likely lead to increased naval deployments, particularly in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, creating a high risk of maritime incidents and possibly disrupting existing trade routes.
Long-term (>1 year)
This unilateral approach will likely destabilise the high seas regime, leading to unchecked resource exploitation and irreversible environmental degradation. The resulting degradation of the oceanic domain will have very significant global complications.
