"Mine, Baby, Mine": Trump's New US Deep-Sea Strategy

Through a series of swift policy announcements in late January and early February 2026, the Trump administration has introduced a new push to tie deep-ocean resources to American industrial resilience.

By combining a US$12bn (£9.5bn) funding mechanism with an assertive regulatory framework, the administration is positioning itself to challenge China's dominance in the critical minerals sector.

The strategy's centrepiece emerged on 2 February 2026 with the announcement of Project Vault. This US$12bn initiative, funded largely through a US$10bn US Export-Import Bank loan, aims to establish a strategic reserve for minerals including cobalt, nickel and rare earths.

US President Donald Trump characterised the project as a civilian equivalent to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, designed to shield companies such as General Motors (GM) and Google from what he described as Chinese "price manipulation and supply shocks."

In 2025, President Trump positioned deep-sea mining as critical to national security and economic competitiveness: "For too long, we have let China hold our industries hostage.

"They think they can turn off the lights on our auto plants and our defence systems whenever they want. Not on my watch. We're going to 'Mine, Baby, Mine' – from the mountains to the deepest parts of the ocean floor."

"We are creating a strategic vault that will make our country richer and more secure than ever before. If the UN wants to hold meetings in Jamaica to discuss 'codes' while we secure our future, let them. We're moving forward."

Adam Muellerweiss, President of the Responsible Battery Coalition, adds: "Project Vault is exactly the kind of serious, industrial-strength action America needs right now. Even two years ago, this idea would have been unthinkable."

Fast-tracking deep-sea mining permits

To supply Project Vault, the administration is turning attention to the ocean floor. On 21 January, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) finalised a 113-page regulation enabling US companies to expedite deep-sea mining permits.

The rule revises the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act of 1980. Where companies previously needed to apply for exploration and commercial recovery permits separately, they can now submit both applications simultaneously, potentially reducing the timeline by several years.

"This consolidation modernises the law and supports the America First agenda," says NOAA Administrator Neil Jacobs.

The decision to use a 1980 domestic statute to issue permits in international waters, circumventing the UN's International Seabed Authority (ISA), has generated diplomatic controversy.

The ISA, which has spent years developing a global mining code, described the unilateral action as "surprising" and cautioned it "sets a dangerous precedent that could destabilise the entire system of global ocean governance."

The US has not ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). 

Scientific concerns over ecological impact

The move towards commercial seafloor mining has raised alarm among marine scientists. The deep sea has not been commercially exploited previously and knowledge of its ecosystems remains limited.

Sabine Gollner, a marine biologist, warns that once polymetallic nodules are removed, "all biodiversity and functions directly dependent on the minerals will be lost for millions of years."

These concerns have intensified following the recent discovery of "dark oxygen" – oxygen generated by seafloor nodules without sunlight.

Environmental advocates argue that mining operations could eliminate this process entirely.

Pacific territories voice opposition

The "Blue Frontier" initiative is encountering resistance from US Pacific territories.

Representatives from American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, spanning both Republican and Democratic parties, have expressed unified opposition.

As the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management prepares to lease millions of acres of Pacific waters, local leaders have raised concerns that indigenous communities are being marginalised in the decision-making process.

From Washington's policy chambers to the ecosystems of the Mariana Trench, the administration appears to view the deep sea as a strategic arena for geopolitical competition, regardless of environmental or diplomatic implications.