Op-Ed: A credible strategy emerging to secure US critical supply chains

Amidst the polarized debate over the new US Administration’s trade policy, President Trump has taken a series of measures – from permitting reform to the nascent peace plan for Ukraine – demonstrating a concerted, new, strategic commitment to securing critical minerals supply chains.The bedrock of the modern digital economy, from EV cars and smartphones to F-35 fighter aircraft, demand for critical minerals has doubled, creating a $320 billion market, and is set to double again by 2030. So too, today’s cutting-edge military hardware, on which our national security rests, depends on rare earths – from drones to submarines.The Chinese economy has focused on building supply for over twenty years. Capitalizing on this head start in the critical minerals race, China today accounts for over 90% of rare earth refining, 77% of cobalt refining, and holds similar monopolies in nickel and lithium. 75% of all lithium-ion batteries are made in China.A lack of security in critical mineral supply chains threatens the US’ industrial base, technological innovation and the energy transition. Within 90 days of entering the Oval Office, the President and his administration have demonstrated their commitment to tackling this daunting challenge.Among the slew of Executive Orders churned out by the White House, the Administration is reviewing the case for adding copper and uranium to the US list of priority minerals, driving forward permitting reform (it currently takes on average 29 years to permit a mining project in the US), re-focusing the Quad (the security alliance of the US, Australia, Japan and India) on supply chains, and bringing the cross-government work on critical minerals under the remit of the new National Energy Dominance Council.Furthermore, public sector land is being reviewed for mining and processing projects, and the Defense Industrial Base Consortium is forging stronger public-private partnerships. Key appointments demonstrate a focus on the issue. As Florida Senator, Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, co-authored the bipartisan Rubio-Warner Bill in 2024 – which called for expanded financial tools to unlock investment in critical minerals projects in the US and abroad, stronger public-private partnerships and a more agile approach to developing the international partnerships needed to friend-shore supply chains.In foreign policy, a strategic lens underlies the more abrasive approach to allies. Whilst the public diplomacy on Greenland may not have warmed its citizens, not to mention Denmark, towards friendly acquiescence, the strategic objectives are anything but haphazard with Greenland’s resource wealth in critical minerals – from graphite and copper to zirconium (essential for nuclear reactors).Likewise, the new President has presented a deal to Ukraine to secure off-take from its range of critical minerals, as part of a peace plan and a condition of ongoing US support with the war effort. Ukraine has abundant deposits of rare earths, is one of the few countries with accessible titanium reserves, and large quantities of lithium, copper and gallium (key for semiconductor production). While a working agreement looks far away, a strategy that secures a just peace, unlocks billions of dollars of investment in the postwar reconstruction of Ukraine and secures Western supply chains in critical minerals would be something of a diplomatic coup.Amidst this blizzard of activity, the contours of a credible strategy are starting to emerge. But gaps remain. How will the US level the playing field with China with respect to the cost of capital that investors face in bidding for mining projects? It is one thing to repeal Biden-era grants and credit, but tariffs and tax cuts alone won’t plug the gap between policymakers’ ambitions and the capex reality for investors.And how can the US and her allies forge more robust public-private partnerships to align investor appetite with geopolitical objectives? A recent report by US think tank SAFE, Resources for Resources, offers some answers drawn from a group of investors that I chaired, on behalf of Appian Capital, a leading private equity firm in metals and mining. Our partnership was established to provide a sounding board to US government policymakers.In particular, the new Administration needs to resolve two conundrums. First, it must decide how to balance the dual economic imperatives of onshoring jobs and securing critical mineral supply chains. They are not the same thing, at least in the short term. There are signs of greater flexibility, with EXIM Bank (the US export-finance agency) launching a revised Supply Chain Resiliency Initiative backing mining projects abroad, to secure off-take into the US. The Development Finance Corporation is being harnessed in support of similar objectives.Second, and related, the US and her allies must show greater agility with international partners. They will only secure a supply of the volume and range of critical minerals needed if they reach out beyond the comfort zone of traditional partners. That means coaxing so-called ‘non-aligned’ countries – including the likes of Brazil, Vietnam, or Indonesia, into partnerships that can reinforce supply chain security.All of this will require diplomatic dexterity – and, in truth, a more transactional approach may be precisely what is required. Still, in less than three months, the new Administration has shown greater discipline than its detractors give credit for, in starting to execute a plan to secure the supply chains pivotal to US and Western economic ambitions.* Dominic Raab is head of global affairs at Appian Capital, and former UK deputy prime minister and foreign secretary.Weiter zum vollständigen Artikel bei Mining.com Weiter zum vollständigen Artikel bei Mining.com