While the administration frames the decision as a strategic move to secure critical minerals and reduce dependency on China, opponents warn it could fracture decades of international maritime cooperation and trigger ecological crises.  

What are key figures saying about this rogue move? 

“By fast-tracking deep-sea mining, the U.S. may undercut international frameworks and create both legal and diplomatic risks.” - Scot Anderson, mining lawyer and co-head of energy and natural resources at Womble Bond Dickinson. “It could embolden nations already expanding maritime claims to push boundaries even further.” 

“Unilateral actions in international waters risk destabilizing a carefully negotiated system at a time when ecological and legal oversight is most needed.” - ISA Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho 

In his foreword to the latest report from Greenpeace titled Deep Deception, retired Major General Randy Manner stated: “The bedrock of national security is not simply weapons or minerals - it is global stability, rule of law, and ecological resilience.” 

Experts at Yale University’s Ocean Conservancy has echoed these concerns. Jeff Watters, the organization’s vice president of external affairs says: “The Executive Order signed by President Trump opens a Pandora’s box of legal and territorial disputes. This isn’t just about environmental impact - it’s about preserving peace and order in international waters.” 

Watters also highlighted the danger of unregulated exploitation. “Until we have enforceable global guidelines, there’s an increasing risk of chaotic, piecemeal development. That makes future maritime conflict far more likely.” 

The international scramble for licenses 

Despite the controversy, companies are surging ahead. The Metals Company (TMC), a Canada-based firm, has applied for a commercial recovery permit and two exploration licenses under the U.S. mining code. The zones, covering almost 200,000 km² of Pacific seabed, are rich in polymetallic nodules containing cobalt, nickel, and rare earths. 

Korea Zinc has invested approximately $85.2 million in TMC, acquiring a 5% stake. The partnership is being marketed as a step toward building a non-Chinese supply chain. 

“This is more than capital,” says TMC CEO Gerard Barron. “It’s alignment on urgency, values, and a resilient U.S.-aligned supply chain.” 

Silicon Valley-based Impossible Metals has asked U.S. officials to auction seabed access off American Samoa, underscoring rising private-sector interest. 

Related: The US vs China: the race for Africa’s critical minerals 

The U.S. is not alone in turning to the deep ocean. Japan, Norway, and the Cook Islands have all launched domestic seabed mining initiatives. Their rationale? A looming shortage of critical minerals.  

With global frameworks in flux, President Trump’s executive order may set a precedent for unilateral mining in international waters - one that others could soon follow. 

“The clock is ticking,” continues Watters. “If one nation starts large-scale seabed mining without international agreement, the floodgates could open. That could unravel decades of careful diplomacy.” 

As the world stares down the dawn of industrial activity on the ocean floor, the central question remains: will nations choose cooperation or competition in governing Earth’s final frontier?