Source: The post United States accelerates deep seabed mining ambitions has been created, based on the article “Digging deep into Trump’s deep sea mining order” published in “Business Standard ” on 18th July 2025
UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper2- Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests.
Context: The Trump administration has prioritized developing US capabilities in seabed mining to secure critical minerals for green technologies and national security. A new executive order aims to fast-track domestic exploration and recovery efforts, prompting legal, environmental, and geopolitical debates, especially concerning the global regulatory framework under UNCLOS.
For detailed information on Deep Ocean Mission read this article here
Strategic Importance of Seabed Mining
- Energy Transition and Mineral Demand: Seabed mineral deposits are critical for clean energy technologies. Nodules found in deep-sea zones contain essential minerals like nickel, cobalt, and rare earths, vital for EV batteries and wind turbines.
- Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone (CCZ): This Pacific region between Mexico and Hawaii may hold more critical minerals than all terrestrial reserves combined, making it a prime area for exploration.
- US Executive Push: Trump’s order mandates US agencies to assess and boost domestic seabed mining capabilities and explore collaborations with allies, positioning the US as a seabed mining leader.
Legal Framework and Global Governance
- Ownership of International Seabed Resources: Under UNCLOS, deep-sea resources are classified as the “common heritage of mankind” and must benefit all nations, especially developing ones. Activities require ISA contracts and follow global rules.
- Role of the International Seabed Authority (ISA): The ISA regulates seabed mining through contracts and ensures equitable benefit-sharing. Although the US hasn’t ratified UNCLOS, it’s still bound by customary international law.
- Challenges to International Norms: The US plan to issue permits to private firms, like the Canadian-affiliated Metal Company, risks bypassing ISA rules. If this path succeeds, it may undermine global efforts for unified seabed mining standards.
Environmental and Ecological Risks
- Scientific Uncertainty and Ecosystem Fragility: Deep-sea ecosystems are poorly understood due to high costs and complexity of research. Benthic species have slow lifecycles and rely on nodules for reproduction, making recovery from disturbances difficult or impossible.
- Global Call for Precaution: Over 25 countries have urged a moratorium or pause on deep-sea mining to prevent irreversible environmental damage and allow for more scientific study.
Geopolitical and Economic Motivations
- Minerals and National Security: Critical minerals are not only essential for green energy but also key to military and technological security. The US aims to reduce its dependence on China-dominated terrestrial supply chains.
- Domestic Supply Chain Prioritization: The Executive Order emphasizes building a robust domestic supply chain. However, restricting mineral exports to favor domestic industries may violate WTO obligations.
- WTO Contradiction: The US previously challenged China’s similar export restrictions in 2012 at the WTO. If it adopts similar strategies now, it risks contradicting its past positions.
Conclusion
The US move to expand seabed mining highlights tensions between environmental protection, international law, and strategic interests. Its unilateral approach may set concerning precedents for global resource governance.
Question for practice:
Examine the legal, environmental, and geopolitical implications of the United States’ push for deep seabed mining as highlighted in the recent executive order.
