By Gregorie Michael Towai (Eipéráng)
As the CNMI confronts the accelerating federal push toward deep sea mineral leasing, I welcome the growing voices of elected leaders, candidates and citizens demanding answers. We need those voices, and this fight is far from over. But after months of trying to raise awareness about this issue, I cannot ignore the larger question before us: why does the CNMI repeatedly wait until a major issue reaches an advanced stage before mobilizing? Deep sea mining is not only a test of how we protect our ocean. It is becoming another example of the cost of reactive government.
My efforts to raise broader questions about ocean policy, sustainable economic development and the future of the CNMI reach back at least to October 14, 2025, when I contacted the Office of Delegate Kimberlyn King-Hinds. My public advocacy specifically sounding the alarm over deep sea mining followed on November 21, 2025, when Marianas Variety published Bryan Manabat’s interview with me, “Refaluwasch advocate: Seabed mining threatens Marianas sovereignty.” That interview came only days after BOEM formally initiated its CNMI process. I warned that allowing an extractive industry to establish a foothold around our islands could gradually diminish our ability to influence what happens next. Exploration can lead to leasing, leasing creates commercial and financial interests, and those interests can eventually become much more difficult for a small island community to reverse.
I never believed opposition alone was sufficient. On December 1, 2025, I published “The Blue Frontier: Choosing Ocean Stewardship Over Seabed Mining,” proposing an alternative economy centered on ocean science, marine research, sustainable fisheries, conservation technology, cultural and navigational knowledge, eco cultural tourism and other ocean based opportunities. If the world suddenly recognizes enormous economic value in the ocean surrounding the Marianas, why should extraction be the principal economic model offered to us? Why shouldn’t we position ourselves to benefit from understanding, studying and protecting that ocean instead?
I also tried to move beyond writing about the problem and bring these ideas directly to those in positions to act. In January 2026, I personally wrote to House Speaker Edmund Villagomez proposing a CNMI Deep Sea Mining Task Force bringing together scientists, legal and economic experts, government agencies, fishermen, environmental specialists, traditional knowledge holders and community representatives. I received no response. Separately, Delegate King-Hinds’ legislative assistant, Jackson Dalman, followed up regarding my earlier October inquiry, and I responded on January 7, 2026. These efforts mattered to me because my objective was never simply to publish criticism or receive recognition for an idea. I wanted the Commonwealth organized while there was still time to influence what was coming.
By February 2026, I was publicly arguing that deep sea mining represented much more than an environmental question. It was becoming a test of governance, consultation, economic planning and territorial self determination. I also communicated directly with DLNR Secretary Sylvan Igisomar, who informed me that DLNR had met with BOEM representatives, discussed a federal territorial task force and recommended that Governor David M. Apatang formally request such a task force through the Department of the Interior. That was encouraging because it suggested that the need for a more organized response was being recognized within government.
In March 2026, I again sounded the alarm in “The CNMI Must Organize Now on Deep Sea Mining.” I also continued engaging Delegate King-Hinds’ congressional office regarding CNMI Ocean Innovation and the Blue Frontier Initiative, including correspondence on March 12, 2026, following her remarks concerning the future of the CNMI economy. On March 16, her legislative assistant confirmed receipt and indicated that the office would respond when ready. Then, on March 23, in “The Marianas at a Crossroads: Militarization, Extraction and the Illusion of Partnership,” I proposed a broader Marianas Blue Frontier Initiative connecting ocean science, conservation, cultural knowledge, sustainable development and regional cooperation. Throughout these efforts, my message remained consistent: the CNMI should not wait for outside interests or federal policy to define our future. We should arrive with a strategy of our own.
There is another part of this history that deserves particular attention today. BOEM officials came to the CNMI and met with Governor David M. Apatang and his administration while members of our community were expressing opposition to deep sea mining. Data and analysis were presented, concerns were communicated, and there was an expectation of continued consultation and collaboration. Yet rather than seeing the potential footprint narrow as those concerns were considered, BOEM’s Area Identification process expanded the area under consideration from approximately 35.5 million acres to roughly 69 million acres, including a major new area west of the CNMI and substantially closer to Guam.
That sequence should concern everyone regardless of where they stand on mining. Federal officials came to our islands, met with our government, heard community opposition and discussed continuing engagement, yet the potential area subsequently nearly doubled. This raises a fundamental question: what does consultation mean if the people being consulted cannot identify how their concerns materially influenced the outcome? There is a difference between being allowed to speak and having the ability to shape a decision. Partnership cannot simply mean that Washington makes consequential decisions while island communities are afforded opportunities to comment. If we are truly partners, our participation must have consequence.
This is precisely why I proposed a Deep Sea Mining Task Force. Had such a body been established early, every BOEM meeting could have been part of a sustained Commonwealth strategy rather than an isolated engagement. Scientists, attorneys, economists, fishermen, cultural practitioners and government representatives could have independently analyzed federal data, established environmental baselines, mapped fisheries and cultural interests, examined royalties and liability, tracked federal commitments and coordinated continuously with Guam and American Samoa. We might not have been able to stop every federal action, but we would have been better positioned to influence them.
On August 3, 2026, I again warned about what could be coming in “American Samoa Is the Test Case. Guam and the CNMI May Be Next.” American Samoa’s process had already advanced further toward leasing, and I believed the CNMI needed to pay close attention. I questioned where bonus bids, rents, royalties and profits would go, what benefits would actually return to territorial communities, who would fund environmental monitoring, who would carry liability for damage to fisheries and ecosystems, and whether territorial communities would retain meaningful influence once leases, investments and commercial expectations became established.
That warning has now become even more relevant. On August 17, 2026, the federal process involving approximately 69 million acres of seabed around the Marianas moved another significant step toward a potential commercial lease sale. What was once treated as an emerging possibility is moving closer to an actual leasing process. Now we are seeing increasing political alarm over federal authority, territorial self determination, environmental risks, public opposition and whether the CNMI receives meaningful benefits while assuming potentially enormous long term risks.
I welcome those voices. This is not about saying, “I told you so.” But neither should we erase the record of what happened before we reached this point. From October 2025 through August 2026, I raised these concerns through direct correspondence with our congressional office, interviews, Op-Eds and communications with Commonwealth officials. I proposed a Blue Frontier economic alternative, a CNMI Deep Sea Mining Task Force and later a broader Marianas Blue Frontier Initiative. I communicated with DLNR and the congressional office. Our government itself met with BOEM, and members of our community voiced opposition. What never became visible was the sustained, coordinated, whole of government structure capable of following this issue from beginning to end and ensuring that the Commonwealth entered every federal discussion with clearly defined objectives.
This is what troubles me most. Why does the CNMI so often govern by reaction? Why do we wait until a federal decision has advanced, infrastructure reaches crisis, an industry collapses or a deadline approaches before declaring all hands on deck? Our ability to mobilize when our backs are against the wall demonstrates tremendous resilience, but resilience cannot substitute for foresight. Leadership should not only be measured by how effectively we respond to a crisis. It should also be measured by whether we recognized what was approaching and prepared our people before it arrived.
Our ancestors understood this principle long before modern governments created strategic plans and task forces. They navigated one of the largest oceans on Earth by reading the stars, currents, winds, clouds and swells before danger reached the canoe. Our modern institutions should possess that same capacity for foresight. Deep sea mining will not be the last major issue to test us. Artificial intelligence, renewable energy, critical mineral supply chains, military expansion, fisheries pressures, climate change, undersea infrastructure and emerging technologies will all present opportunities and risks. We cannot continue discovering each major development after somebody else has already written the plan.
Whatever opportunities were missed, this fight is not over. Our leaders should continue challenging decisions that threaten the Commonwealth’s environmental, economic and cultural interests. They should demand that BOEM explain specifically how CNMI concerns and public comments influenced its decisions, coordinate with Guam, American Samoa and other Pacific communities, insist upon independent science, examine every legal avenue available and demand transparency about who receives the economic benefits and who carries the environmental risk. I still believe the CNMI Deep Sea Mining Task Force should be established, and I still believe the Blue Frontier deserves serious consideration as a long term economic strategy. The fact that these actions should have happened earlier is not a reason to abandon them now.
Ultimately, this is not about who sounded the alarm first. It is about what government does with warnings while there is still time to act. The CNMI needs to become a Commonwealth that is conducting research before proposals arrive, building alliances before comment periods begin, identifying opportunities before outside interests define them for us and entering negotiations carrying our own objectives rather than reacting to somebody else’s.
We are an ocean people. Successful navigation does not begin when the storm reaches the canoe. It begins by understanding the conditions around us, knowing where we want to go and watching the horizon. We may be late in confronting this particular storm, but we are not powerless. Let us fight what is before us now with everything available to us while making certain that, when the next major issue appears on the horizon, the CNMI is finally prepared not merely to react, but to lead.
Gregorie Michael Towai (Eipéráng) is a CNMI born independent researcher, cultural advocate, and founder of the Refaluwasch Journal of Knowledge and Culture (RJKC). His work focuses on Pacific governance, resilience, Indigenous stewardship, and sustainable futures for island communities.
Editor’s note: The views and opinions expressed in this op-ed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of NMI News Service or its staff. All assertions are the sole responsibility of the writer.
