It is an irony that the minerals needed to save the planet might help destroy it. Rare earths, the mineral backbones of wind turbines and electric vehicles, are now the prize in a geopolitical arms race. The trade agreement between Washington and Beijing restores rare earth shipments from China to the US, which had been suspended in retaliation against US President Donald Trump’s tariffs.
Behind the bluster, there has been a realization in Washington that these are critical inputs for the US. They are needed not just by US icons such as Ford and Boeing, but for its fighter jets, missile guidance systems and satellite communications.
This understanding suggests that Washington would scale back some of its countermeasures once Beijing resumes delivery of rare earths. The paradox is that to reduce its dependence on China, the US must depend on Beijing a little longer. This is not yet decoupling; it is deferment.
However, that might not last. Trump has signed an executive order to boost production of critical minerals, which encourages the faster granting of permits for mining and processing projects. He eyes Ukraine’s and Greenland’s subterranean riches to break dependence on China.
The West became so reliant on a single geopolitical rival for such materials — materials it once extracted and refined domestically before shuttering operations — due to cost and environmental concerns.
China, for its part, has come to dominate global rare earth processing. It has used that market power before — notably against Japan in 2010. It is hard not to think that it was strategic complacency that led to the West relying so heavily on China for key minerals.
Last month’s NATO summit has seen the West push to reindustrialize via rearming itself. This is also reawakening long-dormant extractive ambitions in the global north.
Canada, flush with critical mineral deposits, says its planned mining resurgence would be a new foundation for alliance solidarity. Last month, the EU called for strategic reserves of rare earths “to prevent supply chain disruptions and economic blackmail from China” — highlighting their importance not just for electric vehicles, but for the defense and aerospace industries. “Resilience” means digging deeper at home and controlling extraction abroad.
The same minerals we need for net zero are being justified in terms of zero-sum rivalry. It is uncomfortable that “green growth” and militarism have merged into a single policy frame, collapsing the distinction between ecological transition and arms buildup. A magnet for an electric car is also a magnet for a hypersonic missile. Meanwhile, the human and ecological toll continues to rise — largely out of sight and out of sync with the idea of environmental sustainability.
A Guardian dispatch last week from Baotou, China’s rare earth capital, found evidence of toxic ponds, poisoned soil and demolished “cancer villages” — the hidden cost of our digital and electric age. Framing this as an inconvenient necessity risks repeating past mistakes. For mineral-rich nations, the surge in global demand brings opportunity.
However, as a UN report this year noted, without strong institutions and safeguards, it risks a familiar fate: corruption, conflict and environmental ruin.
Today’s scramble for critical minerals must not see the promises of responsible sourcing give way to a familiar logic — extract first, moralize later.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
Life as we know it will probably not come to an end in Japan this weekend, but what if it does? That is the question consuming a disaster-prone country ahead of a widely spread prediction of disaster that one comic book suggests would occur tomorrow. The Future I Saw, a manga by Ryo Tatsuki about her purported ability to see the future in dreams, was first published in 1999. It would have faded into obscurity, but for the mention of a tsunami and the cover that read “Major disaster in March 2011.” Years later, when the most powerful earthquake ever
RSS