by Aude-Emilie Dorion,
Nouméa, New-Caledonia

On the eve of the United Nations Ocean Conference, held in Nice from the 9^th to 13^th of June, geopolitical and economic tensions surrounding seabed mining are reaching new heights. While American relations with the International Seabed Authority (ISA) have run up against financial and ideological obstacles under the Donald Trump-administration, China has positioned itself as the organization’s biggest backer.

The Pacific seabed, rich in strategic minerals such as poly-metallic nodules and cobalt crusts, is increasingly attracting the attention of nations for its economic and geopolitical potential. The Pacific region therefore finds itself at a crossroads, its future development trajectory influenced by the actions of regional and global powers in their geopolitical competition to secure mineral resources.

Last April, the Congress of New Caledonia approved the creation of a Caledonian Biodiversity Fund, a seemingly laudable initiative, since the territory signed at the same time a 50-year moratorium to protect the 1.3 million km of its natural park of the Coral Sea. However, behind this façade lurks a more troubling reality: funding of US$4 million, offered via the « Unlocking Blue Pacific Prosperity » program and piloted by the Bezos Foundation¹, is conditional on the creation of new marine reserves. This funding would not be channeled through local institutions, but through an American NGO, Conservation International, which would thus have a say in the management of New Caledonia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

More broadly, this situation raises questions about the sovereignty and autonomy of Pacific island countries and territories (PICTs) when international competition for resources in minerals is increasing in the region. In these negotiations, the local fishing industries – whose activities are exemplary in terms of sustainability and respect for the environment – were not consulted. New Caledonia’s deep-sea fishing industry, which employs 850 people and supplies 80% of production for local consumption, could in times be at threat. At 4 million, $15 per km², this deal looks more like a loss of sovereignty than real aid. This week, as the international community prepares to discuss ocean protection in Nice, questions are being raised, including what future for ocean protection when geostrategic risks are on the rise? In light of recent events and the underlying questions raised by proven foreign interference in this political conflict, New Caledonia, like other Pacific island territories already under pressure from the consequences of global warming, have to navigate carefully between the interests of the superpowers and the preservation of their cultural and natural heritage. 

Climate emergency, political instability, the Pacific states and territories endowed with large deposits of strategic minerals and rare earths are under pressure for their great potential for deep-sea mining. If well managed, these natural resources could offer the PICTs the opportunity to launch a process of sustainable and inclusive structural transformation. But without an awareness of the geopolitical shifts taking place around the 4^th industrial revolution, and without certain organizational and technological capacities, the value of strategic minerals will remain monopolized by the major international players while deep-sea mining can affect the fisheries resource, an economic resource shared by all PICTs. Once this resource is gone, their livelihoods will be under threat. Although small, these island states have an important role to play: by strategically leveraging their relationships with traditional Western powers and China (and now the BRICS+)², will they be able to steer their development towards a more sustainable and prosperous future?

Global context: green transition and military-industrial strategies

Following the last annual BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, last October, the group of southern countries, which numbered 10 countries in 2023 and has reportedly since been approached by 34 others, reaffirms its intention to challenge the dominance of the traditional industrial powers (the United States, the European Union and Japan) and establish a new world order through geoeconomics, geopolitics and supply chains for critical minerals (CMs) and rare earth elements (REEs). The fourth industrial revolution, based on decarbonizing the global economy in response to global warming, is gradually triggering a mining boom for these raw materials, which are essential to the production of future technologies, renewable energies and defense applications.

Controlling energy raw materials supply chains

According to the World Bank, around 3 billion tonnes of critical minerals will be needed to decarbonize the global energy system by 2050. Production of minerals such as graphite, lithium and cobalt will need to increase by almost 500% between now and 2050 to meet the needs of clean energy and the defense industry. While the raw materials market has long been dominated by the powers of the North, the BRICS+ are now moving forward to control the supply chains for energy and metal raw materials on a global scale. All the country members of this organization are major producers of raw materials, notably oil, gas, metals and minerals, and during their summit, they emphasized the establishment of a « raw material exchange » similar to OPEC – which holds 80% of the world’s oil reserves – signaling the growing influence of the bloc on the international scene to take control of supply.

China and its strategy to dominate on the world’s mineral resources

China has become the ‘world’s factory’ over the last quarter of a century, single-handedly dominating the supply chains for many strategic minerals. With this supremacy, Beijing seems to be taking its revenge on Western countries, which were rather slow in realizing how dependent they were on the Middle Kingdom for these minerals that are essential to their security and prosperity. The assessment of the defense and mining policies and strategies of some of the world’s superpowers³ with regard to CMs as well as the change of geopolitical direction present a multitude of risks for both humans and the environment: many CMs and REEs deposits are located in underdeveloped countries facing problems of geo-economic escalation, corruption, pollution, violence and military conflicts directly linked to mining.

Growing BRICS interest in the southern Pacific islands

The high geographical concentration of CMs and the increasingly competitive demand for these resources among the countries of the world are prompting renewed attention to the management and application of human rights and environmental laws in a region highly exposed to the consequences of global warming. After two decades of intensive extraction on the African continent, Russia and China are now turning their attention to the Pacific, gradually increasing their influence of the region’s island states and territories, either through political destabilization (see current events in Papua – New Guinea and the unprecedented crisis that New-Caledonia has been experiencing for just over a year), or through funding programs to address climate change (Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Samoa, Nauru). In the context of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, China’s South-South cooperation with the Pacific island countries is bound to bring new opportunities, but also new challenges.

Resources under pressure, case study: the vulnerability of Pacific island states and territories

Deep-sea mining in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), an area of the Pacific that stretches over 4.5 million square kilometers between Hawaii and Mexico – equivalent in size to the European Union – is a perfect example. This area is probably one of the most coveted at the moment, while other poly-metallic nodule and cobalt resources also extend further south in the region (see map). When it comes to the impact of deep-sea mining, the PICTs are threatened both socio-economically and environmentally. While the governments of Palau, Fiji, Samoa ideas also supported by New Zealand, Germany and France, and while New-Caledonia signed a 50-year moratorium⁴ in April to protect its EEZ, other Pacific island states would not be opposed to a pact with the devil to solve their issues around global warming…

Divide and conquer

According to Deborah Pranis, an environmental journalist in Papua – New Guinea, and my own observations in New-Caledonia throughout last year’s conflict, it striking to see how limited information the Oceanian communities can get on these topics. Issues that are almost absent from local political and public debates, more readily investigated in the academic arena. During the violent uprising in May last year – with contested electoral reforms sparking riots in which fourteen people died in the archipelago, disinformation and anti-colonial claims spread on social media platforms and cyber-attacks against institutions and private companies were carried out by foreign players: Azerbaijan, Russia and China leading to greater penetration of the region by these countries. There seems to be a complex link between these cyber-attacks and the geopolitical tensions observedsince then⁵. As a result, regional watchdogs and other cooperation bodies are reorganizing themselves around this foreign interferences. 

Challenges and solutions for a sustainable development in the Pacific

In this rather worrying context how will the Pacific island countries and territories be able to preserve their sovereignty? And how can development agendas be guaranteed without dramatic socio-economic and environmental costs for these highly vulnerable territories? What are the solutions for tomorrow on a regional scale, and how can these islands navigate carefully in the face of the superpowers that are trying to seduce them? Should the PICTs be working together on mining regulations, and if so, under what authority? What form of governance should be adopted, and do we have the data needed to assess the potential damage caused by these activities?

These are open questions, both in terms of their practical approach and the geopolitical consequences they’ll induce for the decades to come.

Superpower strategies and regional ambitions

The strategies of the world’s superpowers to develop their trade and secure access to major infrastructures such as ports, airports and shipping lanes in the Pacific region have a taste of déjà vu and seems to follow the very old same modus operandi: development aid programs and/or much more offensive initiatives such as social, political and cyber destabilization. Welcome to a world where the superpowers have no other interest than to consolidate their position on the global chessboard, often to the detriment of local balances and the sovereignty of the countries and territories they covet. This competition for influence and control of resources is passing a milestone in the Pacific: the BRICS, led by China, are continuing to strengthen their regional presence, both diplomatically and economically, while developing their deep-sea research capabilities.

With at least twelve institutions dedicated to this research, China is preparing to play a central role in the exploitation of the pacific seabed. The country has even just obtained authorization from the ISA to carry out exploitation tests. Although no details have been given publicly about these exploration activities or the geographical area targeted, there is no doubt that the Clarion-Clipperton zone will be one of the first to be involved.

ENDS//

Caption: World map showing the location of the three main marine mineral deposits: poly-metallic nodules (blue), poly-metallic or seafloor massive sulfides (orange) and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts (yellow). Redrawn from a number of sources, including Hein et al. (2013). Front. Mar. Sci, 10 January 2018 Sec. Deep-Sea Environments and Ecology Volume 4 – 2017| https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00418