Global Outcry Over Deep Sea Mining Firm’s Pacific Metal Extraction Plan Under U.S. Law

In a controversial move that has sparked international outcry, The Metals Company (TMC), a Vancouver-based deep-sea mining firm, has applied for permits to mine metals in the Pacific Ocean’s Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ) under U.S. law, bypassing the international regulatory framework established by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This bid, supported by an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump on April 24, 2025, has raised significant concerns about environmental impacts, international law violations, and the undermining of global ocean governance.

The Metals Company’s U.S. Permit Application

On April 29, 2025, TMC’s U.S. subsidiary, The Metals Company USA LLC, submitted applications to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for a commercial recovery permit and two exploration licenses under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA) of 1980. The applications target a 25,160-square-kilometer area in the CCZ, a vast region of the Pacific Ocean between Mexico and Hawaii, rich in polymetallic nodules containing critical minerals like nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese. These metals are essential for technologies such as electric vehicle batteries, renewable energy infrastructure, and military equipment.

The move comes on the heels of President Trump’s executive order, titled “Unleashing America’s Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources,” which directs NOAA to expedite seabed mineral exploration and commercial recovery permits in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The order emphasizes U.S. national security and economic interests, citing the need to counter China’s influence over critical mineral supply chains.

International Backlash and Legal Concerns

The international community has strongly criticized TMC’s application and the U.S. executive order, arguing that they violate UNCLOS, a treaty ratified by 169 member states and the European Union, but not the United States. UNCLOS designates the seabed beyond national jurisdictions, known as “the Area,” as the “common heritage of humankind,” prohibiting any state or entity from unilaterally exploiting its resources. The International Seabed Authority (ISA), established under UNCLOS, is the sole body authorized to regulate deep-sea mining in international waters.

ISA Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho expressed “deep concern” over TMC’s attempt to circumvent the ISA’s authority, stating that any unilateral action would undermine multilateralism and the peaceful use of the oceans. She emphasized that the ISA’s regulatory framework ensures sustainable use, equitable benefit-sharing, and environmental protection, principles that could be kindized by unilateral mining.

Countries such as China, France, and Costa Rica have echoed these concerns. China, which holds five ISA exploration licenses, called the U.S. initiative a violation of international law that harms the global community’s interests. Pacific Island nations, including Nauru and Tonga, which have previously partnered with TMC for ISA exploration contracts, are now questioning their relationships with the company due to potential legal risks. A coalition of Pacific Island civil society organizations has even called for TMC to be blacklisted by the ISA.

Legal experts, including Duncan Currie of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, argue that TMC’s actions could breach UNCLOS, as the company’s existing ISA contracts through Nauru (Nauru Ocean Resources Inc.) and Tonga (Tonga Offshore Mining Limited) require compliance with international regulations. Currie also noted that nations like Canada, Switzerland, and Japan, which are involved in TMC’s operations or partnerships, are bound by UNCLOS and could face legal consequences for participating in activities that violate the treaty.

Environmental and Ecological Risks

Environmentalists and scientists have raised alarms about the potential ecological consequences of deep-sea mining in the CCZ, an area known for its rich biodiversity, including newly discovered species like the glass octopus. The seabed’s polymetallic nodules, which form over millions of years, provide critical habitats for marine life. Mining operations, which involve deploying large uncrewed vehicles to vacuum nodules from the ocean floor, could cause irreversible damage to ecosystems that are poorly understood by science.

Greenpeace USA’s Arlo Hemphill, a vocal critic of deep-sea mining, described TMC’s move as a “slap in the face to international cooperation” and warned of cascading impacts on the Pacific ecosystem. A Greenpeace report highlighted that the industry’s earlier narrative of mining as a “green solution” for the energy transition has shifted to a national security argument, which critics like retired U.S. Army Major General Randy Manner dismiss as a pretext for speculative commercial ventures. Manner argued that deep-sea mining could erode global stability, rule of law, and ecological resilience, posing greater risks to U.S. national security than benefits.

The lack of comprehensive data on deep-sea ecosystems exacerbates these concerns. Duncan Currie noted that fundamental ecological questions remain unanswered, making it impossible to fully assess or manage the impacts of mining at depths up to 6 kilometers. Thirty-two ISA member states and the European Union have called for a precautionary pause or moratorium on deep-sea mining due to these uncertainties.

TMC’s Shifting Narrative and Strategic Pivot

TMC’s decision to seek U.S. permits marks a strategic pivot from its earlier efforts to secure ISA approval. The company has held three ISA exploration contracts through partnerships with Nauru, Tonga, and Kiribati, and in 2021, Nauru notified the ISA of its intent to sponsor TMC’s commercial mining application. However, the ISA has yet to finalize exploitation regulations, with ongoing debates over environmental safeguards and royalty payments stalling progress. Frustrated by the slow pace, TMC’s CEO, Gerard Barron, cited the ISA’s delays as a reason for pursuing U.S. approval, claiming the company has sufficient data to manage environmental risks.

Initially, TMC framed deep-sea mining as essential for the green transition, arguing that seabed nodules could provide metals for electric vehicle batteries without the social and environmental harms of land-based mining. However, as battery manufacturers shift toward lithium-iron phosphate batteries, which require fewer critical minerals, TMC has pivoted to a national security narrative. Barron has emphasized the need to reduce U.S. dependence on China for critical minerals, a message that aligns with the Trump administration’s priorities.

Critics argue this shift is an attempt to “greenwash” or “security-wash” a speculative industry. They point out that land-based sources and recycling could meet global mineral demand, and deep-sea mining may be financially unviable due to high technological and operational costs.

Implications for U.S. Policy and Global Relations

The U.S.’s non-ratification of UNCLOS has long been a point of contention in deep-sea mining debates, as it excludes the U.S. from holding ISA licenses directly. The DSHMRA, enacted as an interim measure before UNCLOS took effect in 1994, has been dormant for commercial exploitation but is now being invoked to fast-track TMC’s application. Legal experts warn that this unilateral approach could strain U.S. relations with Pacific communities and other nations, weaken its credibility in enforcing international law (such as freedom of navigation), and set a precedent for other states to bypass global governance frameworks.

The Dutch parliament, noting that TMC’s mining operations involve a Swiss-Dutch company, Allseas, has called for legal action against the U.S. and TMC if they proceed in international waters. Additionally, American Samoa’s 2024 moratorium on deep-sea mining within its waters reflects growing regional resistance, highlighting the cultural and economic importance of marine ecosystems to Pacific Island nations.

The Path Forward

As the ISA continues negotiations to finalize its mining code, expected to resume in 2026, the international community faces a critical juncture. TMC’s U.S. application, if approved, could set a precedent for other companies to bypass the ISA, potentially leading to a “Wild West” scenario in deep-sea mining. The ISA has warned of legal, diplomatic, and economic risks, including challenges to the sale of minerals mined unilaterally.

Meanwhile, environmental advocates and scientists urge a precautionary approach, emphasizing the need for more research on deep-sea ecosystems. The controversy surrounding TMC’s bid underscores the tension between resource extraction, environmental protection, and international cooperation, with significant implications for the future of global ocean governance.

The Metals Company’s pursuit of U.S. permits under the Trump administration’s executive order has ignited a global debate over the legality, environmental risks, and geopolitical consequences of deep-sea mining. As nations denounce the move as a violation of international law, the world watches closely to see whether the U.S. and TMC will proceed, potentially reshaping the management of the planet’s shared ocean resources.