On April 24, local time, US President Trump signed an executive order requiring the government to "accelerate the review and issuance of seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial mining licenses in areas beyond national jurisdiction" to rapidly develop the United States' ability to mine and process minerals in domestic and international waters.

This move aims to reduce dependence on China's rare earth supply chain and strengthen the United States' autonomy in the fields of clean energy and defense industries by mining seabed polymetallic nodules (rich in key minerals such as nickel, cobalt, and manganese). However, the executive order has been strongly opposed by many countries, environmental organizations and the scientific community around the world because it bypasses the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), ignores the supervision of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), and may cause irreversible ecological damage.

The core content of the executive order

1. Accelerate the mining license process

Trump requires the US Department of Commerce, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Energy and other agencies to simplify the exploration and commercial licensing approval process for deep-sea mining, give priority to mapping seabed resources, and use tools such as the Defense Production Act to promote private enterprise investment. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has been instructed to speed up the issuance of licenses, and companies such as The Metals Company are expected to obtain licenses in the short term.

2. Strategic goal: counter China's dominance in the supply chain

The White House has made it clear that this move is intended to weaken China's influence in the field of key minerals. China currently controls 92% of the world's rare earth refining capacity and has taken the lead in the development of deep-sea mining technology. The Trump administration is trying to break the dependence by developing the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the eastern Pacific Ocean (where the seabed mineral reserves exceed the total land reserves), but analysis points out that the United States still faces a "30-year gap" in rare earth separation technology and full industrial chain integration, which is difficult to break through in the short term.

3. Bypassing international law and challenging multilateral governance

The executive order bypasses the International Seabed Authority (ISA) under the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and unilaterally authorizes companies to mine on the high seas. Although the United States has not ratified the convention, the international community generally believes that high seas resources are "common heritage of mankind" and development must be coordinated by ISA. The move has been criticized as an "insult to multilateralism" and could exacerbate tensions with 167 signatories, including the European Union, Russia and China.

Environmental risks

1. Ecological damage may be irreversible

The deep-sea ecosystem is extremely fragile. A mining test in the Gulf of Mexico in 1979 showed that the ecology of the damaged area has not recovered after more than 40 years. Scientists point out that polymetallic nodules are rare biological habitats formed over millions of years, and the sediment plumes produced by mining may spread to thousands of square kilometers, threatening fisheries, carbon sink functions and the survival of unknown species. Lisa Levine of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography warned that the chain reaction may lead to "the permanent disappearance of the ecosystem before scientists have time to study it."

2. Conflict between economic interests and environmental consensus

Although the White House claims that deep-sea mining can bring $300 billion in GDP growth and 100,000 jobs, organizations such as Greenpeace International emphasize that economic interests should not override ecological protection.

Geopolitical and economic game

1. Differences among allies and reconstruction of international rules

The United States tried to win over allies to establish a new mining alliance through the "priority cooperation list", but the European Union and the Pacific island nation of Nauru all supported the ISA framework. Guo Jiakun, spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, made a clear statement that no country has the right to unilaterally develop international seabed resources, emphasizing the need to abide by the principle of "common heritage of mankind".

2. Industrial chain dilemma and technical barriers

Even if the United States successfully mines seabed minerals, it still needs to transport the raw materials to China for refining. China has more than 90% of patents in rare earth separation technology and has a mature team of engineers, while the relevant industry in the United States is still blank. Douglas McCauley, a scholar at the University of California, pointed out that undermining international rules will be "counterproductive, and China will use this to consolidate its dominant position."

Trump's executive order is both a microcosm of the battle for resources and a touchstone for global ESG governance. Against the backdrop of doubts about technical feasibility and high environmental risks, it remains to be seen whether the United States can achieve "resource autonomy" at the expense of multilateral rules. How China responds to challenges by strengthening international cooperation and technological advantages may be the key to reshaping the global resource order.

Author：Qinger