Deep-sea mining (DSM1) and deep-seated mischief (DSM2)

These Islands By Robert A. Underwood

In the past few years, Pacific island leaders and thinkers have organized future planning around the concept of the Blue Pacific Continent.

In 2022, the Pacific Islands Forum launched the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent, which starts with the statement: “The Blue Pacific Continent is our home, ocean, lands and common heritage. The Blue Continent includes territories, freely associated states and independent countries."

The Blue Continent covers 20 percent of the world’s surface. This has led to a political ambiance and cultural advocacy that views this vast ocean we inhabit as a uniter rather than a divider. In this decade, we have heard hundreds of politicians' statements about how the ocean is the pathway to our future.

No doubt, thousands of essays by eager young students all over the Pacific insert the phrase “the ocean unites us and doesn’t divide us” in their papers, making the phrase sound trite.

This appeal to our shared cultural heritage of navigation and sustainability, rooted in the ocean, undergirds unity on issues like climate change. It is sometimes used as a philosophical hedge to address the geostrategic challenges of our time. Pacific historian Marco DeJung uses the inventive concept of a “barrier reef” strategy to fend off non-Pacific actors.

But what happens when we get down to the details of actual policy? What happens when geostrategic actors exert their influence in pursuit of the resources of the ocean?

In the past, we associated resource exhaustion by outside powers primarily with fishing. Deep-sea mining was then a theoretical discussion. But now, that conversation has taken center stage, revealing some deep-seated mischief, another kind of "DSM." There are differences in approaches and attitudes that may rival the Challenger Deep for the chasm emerging both inside and outside the reef.

Several Pacific island nations, such as Fiji, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau and the Marshall Islands, oppose seabed mining. Nauru, Tonga, the Cook Islands and Kiribati are open to the idea of scooping seabed minerals from their waters.

Kiribati might be reconsidering its stance, similar to Papua New Guinea, which experienced financial losses on its first venture.

The division is interesting. Inside Micronesia, the count seems to be three-to-two against deep-sea mining.

The U.S. has stepped into the process via a proposal to open up millions of ocean acres near American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Marianas. The effort is led by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management under the Department of the Interior.

The governors of  those three U.S. territories have expressed strong opposition to the U.S. government’s plan to open the surrounding ocean to the harvesting of minerals. The Guam legislature passed a resolution against it.

The bureau's initial proposal covered 35 million acres of ocean in the Marianas. The request to extend the comment period was granted. There was a brief moment of relief. Then reality set in. Despite near-universal opposition, the area doubled in size as the final approved proposal added an additional 33 million acres.

The California-based company Impossible Metals is apparently leading the effort in the BOEM-designated areas north and south of the equator. A spokesperson for Impossible Metals said the company wanted to assist coastal communities, subject to federal regulations. As far as the economic powers outside the reef are concerned, we live in “coastal communities,” not some ocean-based continent.

There are also inducements to start investing in DSM1 available online, even before any actual work. These curious efforts are popping up all over with “can’t miss” investment opportunities. 

The mining variety of DSM1 has led to the mischief characteristic of DSM2. How this growing internal and external chasm is resolved and dealt with by Blue Pacific Continent advocates will reveal the limits of internal strength as well as the limitless exercise of external power.

Will China and the United States continue to invest, entice and pressure island governments to allow DSM1? Will scientific evidence on the dangers of deep-sea mining, combined with a Blue Continent philosophy, mitigate against DSM2?

ADVERTISEMENT

The Pacific Islands Forum and the subregional organization, the Micronesian Island Forum, should address this threat to Blue Continent unity. Perhaps in the interest of avoiding controversy, they would simply allow the issue to limp along.

For struggling island economies, the lure of DSM1 is incredibly strong.

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute reports that critical and rare earth minerals could reach $20 trillion in value. That amount will make being just a coastal community, rather than part of a Blue Continent, seem like the right strategy.

But the Pacific islands have been down this road before. There was some gold in Papua New Guinea and nickel in New Caledonia. There was also phosphate, whales, sandalwood and Beche-de-Mer in various parts of the Pacific. None of these extractive activities did much to benefit the Blue Continent, although some coastal communities saw limited gains. The question facing 21st-century Pacific islands is whether they see themselves primarily as isolated coastal communities or as part of the larger Blue Continent.

Dr. Robert Underwood is the former president of the University of Guam and a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Send feedback to anacletus2010@gmail.com.

Subscribe to

our digital

monthly issue