Despite a recent 90-day trade truce with the United States, China is not relaxing its rigid control over rare earth exports, a strategic move that maintains its leverage amid an increasingly competitive political landscape. The trade agreement, reached in Geneva, aimed at rolling back tariffs imposed during the trade war, yet there remains significant ambiguity regarding China’s commitment to lift its export restrictions on critical rare earth minerals. These minerals are essential for a variety of technologies, including smartphones, electric vehicles, and advanced weapons systems, with China dominating around 61% of global rare earth production and an extraordinary 92% of refining capacity.
The trade agreement stipulated that China would suspend or eliminate some non-tariff countermeasures, leading many to believe this includes the recent rare earth export controls enforced as retaliation against U.S. tariffs. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, upon returning from trade discussions, expressed optimism, claiming, “Yep, the Chinese have agreed to remove those countermeasures.” However, experts have voiced skepticism regarding the actual implementation of these claims. Jon Hykawy, president of Stormcrow Capital, suggests that Greer’s pronouncement reflects more of a hope than a reality, indicating that China might be steadfast in reinforcing its control to ensure a stable supply for its domestic needs.
Recent developments confirm this stance. Following the Geneva talks, while China did remove some American companies from its dual-use export control list, there was a conspicuous absence of any announcement regarding the rare earth controls. Instead, China’s Commerce Ministry has intensified its crackdown on the smuggling of critical minerals and convened discussions aimed at strengthening oversight of mineral production and supply chains.
This new licensing regime, introduced in April, necessitates government approval for each shipment of rare earth materials. Such measures have resulted in significant delays, causing distress among industries reliant on these materials, including automotive and defense sectors, with companies like Volkswagen experiencing shipping holdups. Gracelin Baskaran of the Center for Strategic and International Studies noted that the licensing policy is strategically designed to grant China the upper hand in future negotiations; it allows Beijing the discretion to withhold licenses, effectively using the system as leverage against American interests.
As companies continue to navigate the complexities of China’s export regulations, some, such as a few rare earth magnet producers, have reported receiving licenses under stringent conditions, indicating that these rules are indeed operational. However, the lengthy approval process—taking as many as 45 working days—could severely hamper the capacity of U.S. defense contractors to procure essential materials in a timely manner. Thomas Kruemmer of Ginger International Trade and Investment emphasised that the stringent nature of this licensing could further complicate matters for U.S. defence firms, potentially stalling their operations considerably.
In addition to its rare earth strategies, China has reinforced its commitment to enhancing domestic manufacturing capabilities, as underscored by President Xi Jinping’s recent calls for greater industrial self-sufficiency. While Western nations are increasingly aware of their reliance on Chinese supplies, transitioning away from this dependency in terms of processing capacity will require years of investment and development, especially in regions like Ukraine, which holds substantial mineral reserves yet lacks the refining infrastructure necessary to mitigate reliance on China.
China’s utilisation of rare earths as a geopolitical weapon isn’t novel; instances in the past, such as the 2010 halt of shipments to Japan over territorial disputes, illustrate this strategic leverage well. Today, as global supply chains grapple with the ramifications of these trade tensions, the demand for rare earths—notably lithium, cobalt, and gallium—increases. The uncertainty surrounding exports further complicates the landscape, prompting Western countries to expedite efforts toward establishing alternative supply chains for these crucial resources.
As tensions continue to simmer between the U.S. and China, the ability of Western industries to adapt and evolve in response to these geopolitical manoeuvrings will be put to the test. The stakes are high, and the long-term implications for global supply chains and the broader economy hang in the balance, making the careful scrutiny of China’s moves essential in the coming months.
Reference Map
- Paragraph 1: [1]
- Paragraph 2: [1], [2]
- Paragraph 3: [1]
- Paragraph 4: [1], [4]
- Paragraph 5: [2], [3]
- Paragraph 6: [1], [3]
- Paragraph 7: [2], [6]
- Paragraph 8: [1], [2], [3]
- Paragraph 9: [1], [4], [5]
Source: Noah Wire Services
Subscribe to Industry Updates
