Trump is trying to break China’s monopoly on rare earths, but can’t cut deals fast enough to catch up
By: John Liu (CNN)
Trying to Free Trade a way out of a Free Trade Trap is the height of neoliberal idiocy. Donald Trump is turning into Joe Biden before our eyes. Trump is undermining his own trade policy.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
As Beijing weaponizes its dominance over rare earths supplies, US President Donald Trump is cutting deals to try to break the stranglehold. But his claim that America will have an abundance of the critical minerals in just one year’s time may be a fantasy.
“In about a year from now, we’ll have so much critical mineral and rare earths, and you won’t know what to do with them,” Trump said Monday, after unveiling a $8.5 billion agreement to help Australia develop rare earths projects and secure United States access to those elements.
China controls more than 90% of the global output of refined rare earths, which are used to power everything from iPhones to electric vehicles, and this near-monopoly has become one of its most potent tools in its trade war with the US.
Rare earths emerged as a major sticking point between China and the US earlier this year after Beijing imposed unprecedented export controls on the critical minerals, which led to shortages worldwide, disrupting supply chains.
China’s move this month to tighten control of even trace amounts of China-processed rare earths in other countries sent shockwaves through global manufacturing and prompted Trump to threaten 100% tariffs on Chinese goods –– adding fresh uncertainty to the already tumultuous relationship between the world’s two largest economies.
Under Monday’s deal, the US and Australian governments intend to invest, in the next six months, more than $3 billion in critical minerals projects, expected to yield a value of $53 billion, the White House said. It is unclear when production from the new projects will begin.
As part of the agreement, the Pentagon will also invest in the construction of a 100 metric ton-per-year advanced gallium refinery in Western Australia. And the Export-Import Bank of the United States is issuing letters of interest for over $2.2 billion in financing for critical mineral projects.
The deal has the potential to put Australia in an even more awkward position with its largest trading partner, China. While trying to keep Beijing on side, Canberra has also been bolstering defense ties with Washington amid China’s growing influence in Asia-Pacific.
Although rare earths, a group of 17 elements, are in fact more abundant than gold, the relatively high cost and environmental damage associated with their processing and refinement have placed China in a dominant position in their production worldwide.
Between 2020 and 2023, the US was dependent on China for 70% of its imports of all rare earths compounds and metals, according to a report by US Geological Survey, an agency under the interior department.
And in a note Monday, Goldman Sachs estimated that disruption to just 10% of production in industries dependent on these elements could wipe out $150 billion in US economic output.
The Trump administration has sought to diversify its supplies of rare earths, turning to allies like Australia and other resource-rich countries.
Australia holds the world’s fourth-largest deposits of rare earths, and it has ramped up production over the past half-decade. The country also mines about half of the world’s lithium, a mineral critical to the production of electric vehicle batteries.
Meanwhile, Pakistan has pitched itself as an alternative hub for critical materials, with its leaders last month signing memorandums of understanding with Trump to supply the US with rare earths and other minerals.
Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House’s National Economic Council, said ahead of Trump’s meeting with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese Monday that Australia’s role is instrumental in making the global economy “less risky, less exposed to the kind of rare earth extortion that we’re seeing from the Chinese.”
Australia topped the world as a destination for rare earths exploration, securing $64 million or about 45% of global investment in such projects last year, according to an analysis published Monday by US think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies.
In May, the country’s Lynas Rare Earths firm also became the first company outside China to produce commercial quantities of dysprosium oxide, one of the most important heavy rare earths elements, the think tank said.
But experts are skeptical that Monday’s deal will deliver the much-needed quick turnaround in America’s supply of critical minerals.
“I don’t think that the rare earth supply issues can be solved in the short term, period. China is too far ahead of the world,” said John Mavrogenes, an economic geology professor at the Australian National University.
There has been little concrete progress in developing a rare earths supply chain in Australia, Mavrogenes added. Challenges like high energy costs, shortage of workers with necessary skills and the potential environmental impact pose significant hurdles, he said.
“I’d say we’re a decade away (from building up the required production capacity), even if we really got serious,” he said. “We’d have to make an industry from scratch. And that takes a lot of dedication and long-term planning, and a lot of effort.”
Prof. Rick Valenta, director of the University of Queensland’s Sustainable Minerals Institute, told CNN Affiliate ABC Radio that Australia has no shortage of skill in high-tech mining and processing. But he said it’s been difficult to build expertise in downstream production by relying on market forces alone and the injection of cash from the US-Australia deal will make all the difference.
“There’s a refinery being built in Western Australia now that’s targeting production of rare earths in 2027. We have a whole series of projects that are ready to go but (are) needing that last round of financing support to get them across the line and into production,” he said.
CNN’s Bryan Mena and Hilary Whiteman contributed to this report.
Be a good human. Grossly derogatory comments, blatantly inflammatory comments, excessive trolling, mean-spirited taunting and insults, scamming, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed in compliance with the site's Terms of Service and the Code of Conduct. The moderators have the final word.
Tags
Who is online
167 visitors
Did Trump consider opening mines in the United States might solve the problem of a trade stranglehold? Of course not. Trump is a New York businessman trained to grift, cheat, swindle, bamboozle, flimflam, and do everything possible to avoid work. Milton Friedman would be so proud.
Trump has just abandoned his own tariff policy to sell out the United States again. Trump might as well just cave to China and be done with it.
It would take over a decade for the USA to get reasonably self-sufficient in rare Earth minerals.
An excellent initiative for a forward-thinking, responsible PotUS.
But we are stuck with Trump.
No. The United States already mines and processes rare earth minerals. Expansion could be accomplished much quicker than starting from scratch.
Selling out the United States is an excellent initiative? These deals always depend upon reciprocity which undercuts US resilience. Trading one dependency for another is not a smart thing to do.
And why is that?
I did not say we are starting from scratch. I am including existing mining in my estimate. Note what I wrote: "to get reasonably self-sufficient".
WTF are you talking about??
Trump supporters.
I noted what you wrote and it is still wrong.
I am talking about reciprocity. Did that go over your head? If you want me to read what you wrote then I'm going to expect you to read what I write. Reciprocity.
Obtuse elegance of simplicity. Isn't it because Trump was the better choice for voters? Or is just because democracy sucks when it is uncontrolled?
How long do you think it would take for the USA to be reasonably self-sufficient in rare Earth minerals? Back up your claim.
That makes no sense whatsoever given what I wrote. A full non-sequitur. I am in favor of the USA mining rare Earth.
You think Trump is a good choice for this nation??? Do you imagine Harris inflicting this level of damage???
What damage and be specific with tangible data not your usual bullshit feelings and platitudes, but actual verifiable damage that can be backed up with empirical data. your feelings and opinions do not qualify.
Amazing. A perfect example of partisan blindness.
Trump ...
You actually pen a post asking someone to explain to you the damage that Trump is causing to this nation. As I noted, 'amazing'.
Thank you for proving that there are only thing hurt are feelings, and there is no tangible evidence to support the bullshit claims you are making.
You yet again pen a post expressing blindness to the facts. No matter what, you deliver a feckless ˜nuh-uh˜ and constantly require people to keep providing you more information that:
a) you should already know if you are paying even the slightest attention
and
b) is easily found with Google and/or AI tools.
Pathetic.
I have attempted to post a session with ChatGPT which has crashed this web page three times. I'm going to try Gemini next. But I'll post that in a separate comment. Bottom line was that defense needs and a significant portion of commercial needs could be achieved by 2030.
What you wrote was "WTF are you talking about??"
I have stated in numerous discussions that Donald Trump was a better choice than Kamala Harris. Trump's crackdown on immigration, more protective trade policy, willingness to raise taxes in a more sensible manner, and more isolationist stance on deploying military force were far superior policy proposals than Harris was offering.
Kamala Harris promised to defend the damage caused in the past and promised to add her own damage. Harris would have expanded foreign aid to strengthen our adversaries, pursued trade policy increasing our dependence upon adversaries, attempted to use military threats to overcome dependence, would have retained and possibly expanded the regressive subsidies enacted under Biden, raised taxes the wrong way to hinder competitiveness and raise prices, and the list goes on. Harris did not promise to address any of the damage caused over the last 40 years.
I originally made the query to ChatGPT but copy and paste of the response crashed the web page. Making the same query should provide a similar response. The formatting is a little screwy but it doesn't matter since the response will automatically be rejected.
Question: "How quickly could the United States expand rare earth mineral production from domestic sources?"
Gemini 2.5 Flash:
The primary challenge is that domestic rare earth production capacity is not a single number, but a chain of three distinct industrial processes, each with its own timeline:
Mining (Extraction): Available now.
Separation/Refining (Processing): Available now, but scaling up to meet demand.
Magnet/Alloy Manufacturing (End-Use): Expected to begin commercial operation by mid-2026.
Here is a breakdown of the current capacity, timeline for expansion, and the benefits of this domestic vertical integration.
I. Timeline for Domestic U.S. Rare Earth Expansion
The US is currently on a path to achieve a fully domestic "mine-to-magnet" supply chain for defense and a portion of commercial needs between 2026 and 2030.
II. Economic and Supply Chain Resilience Benefits
A. Economic Boost to the United States
Increasing domestic production creates high-value jobs and secures critical inputs for the fastest-growing sectors of the U.S. economy:
Job Creation: Developing a fully integrated supply chain requires:
Guaranteed Investment & Price Floor: The U.S. government is employing measures like the Defense Production Act (DPA) to provide long-term procurement contracts and even price floor commitments (e.g., a 3$\$110$ per kilogram price floor for Neodymium-Praseodymium) to American producers.4 This provides the investment certainty needed to build billion-dollar domestic plants.
B. Supply Chain Resilience (Zero-Trust Supply)
Domestic production significantly enhances supply resilience because the supply chain is no longer subject to the political or logistical risks of foreign sources.
Mitigating Foreign Price Manipulation: A dedicated domestic supply line with guaranteed government contracts insulates U.S. manufacturers from non-market-driven price spikes and export restrictions set by other nations.5
Securing Defense Inputs: The Department of Defense (DOD) has a clear goal to secure a complete mine-to-magnet REE supply chain that can meet all U.S. defense needs by 2027.6 This domestic production is essential for a "zero-trust" supply of materials vital for F-35 fighter jets, advanced radar systems, and precision munitions.7
Insulation from Global Shocks: By having a U.S.-based source for the entire value chain—from digging the ore to producing the finished component—the U.S. industrial base is protected from any single foreign shock, whether it be a natural disaster, conflict, or arbitrary trade policy.
Pathetic describes your trump posts perfectly.
I don't let others think for me, chat AI is for the lazy or stupid.
lets look shall we.
This is an opinion, not a fact WORTHLESS to meet the criteria
This is another opinion, Worthless without factual data
When you use the word attempt it is opinion or feeling. WORTHLESS
See above Worthless
It is opinion that the Tariffs are irresponsible
Opinion Worthless
Opinion, No bases in fact.
Presidents have hired and fired from the beginning of this nations, only thing i see is your OPINION is that trump is somehow different.
Opinion
Opinion
Opinion, when fucktard democrats order police to not support or come to the aid of ICE or Federal officers than something needs to be done, it is only your opinion that this is the wrong way to do it
This comment sums up how worthless the opinion of trumps presidency really is.
Prove it, show how trumps net worth has increased since he became Potus, last term Trumps net worth when elected was 4.5 billion when he left office it was 2.1 so your OPINION is not only bullshit but a bold face lie.
Charted: Donald Trump's Net Worth (2014-2024)
The Definitive Net Worth Of Donald Trump
To sum up your attempt is nothing but a continued list of opinions and you have epically failed to prove any point by any measurable metric.
Everyone is out to get Trump. He is immaculately innocent.
Nobody said that John, and everyone is entitled to their OPINIONS, but to try to promote opinions as fact is Hubris.
Donald Trump is a fucking idiot. Joe Biden was a lot worse. And Kamala Harris was no better.
The typical Trump supporter 'rebuttal': 'but, but, but that is just your opinion' , as if the opinion is incorrect. A bullshit reply when you cannot come up with a real rebuttal. Pathetic.
Why are you off yapping about chatGPT, etc.? My post did not quote or contain any of its content. Hello?
But given you mentioned it, your attitude about these tools is sad. You do not realize the value of the tools available to you. You somehow believe that if you use these tools they will be doing your thinking for you. I suggest you learn about these tools and figure out how to use them because, unless you do, you will be left behind by those who are not afraid of technology.
So other than your canned bullshit of 'just opinion', you actually try to rebut a point. Here is the point I made:
And this is how you attempted (poorly) to rebut it:
For starters, I did not comment on his net worth (and especially not about the 2016-2020 period exclusively ... pathetic). What I noted is that Trump is (note present tense) abusing the presidency for his own enjoyment and enrichment. Apparently, you do not see that Trump is using his influence to:
I think just with these examples, one would have to be partisan blind to not recognize that Trump is using the presidency for his own personal enjoyment/enrichment.
Now, on net worth:
So you dishonestly misrepresented my claim and argued a strawman and ignored the reality of Trump's current net worth. Your accusation that I lied is pure projection.
I 100% accurately described your opinion. All you have is opinions that aren’t any more factually valid than the most diehard MAGA.
All opinions without anything tangible.
Pathetic indeed.
That question does not correlate with my claim. I claimed this:
So let's see what ChatGPT says when a proper question is asked:
PROMPT : How long would it take for the USA to get reasonably self-sufficient in rare Earth minerals?
RESPONSE :
Note: "To feel truly insulated from Chinese supply shocks across the full value chain, plan on the early–mid 2030s"
Given this is a major new initiative, it is far easier for it to take more time and money than originally estimated. Over a decade is a practical estimate given this is not even an initiative. So if we have sensible leadership, this would be a top priority right now! But from what I can tell, nobody is even thinking about this in Congress much less laying the groundwork for legislation and funding.
You again demonstrate that you have nothing and will stubbornly engage in the nuh-uh bullshit no matter what.
Even the different prompt aligns with what Gemini provided (and ChatGPT provided but I gave up posting). The US could supply defense needs from domestic sources within the next three years. The US could supply almost all if not all critical needs in five years. There is a lot of uncertainty about adoption of EVs. And shifting more production of solar panels and wind turbines to domestic production would increase domestic demand. But at this point the production of EVs and alternative energy generators are not critical.
So, the time frame is considerably shorter than your original projection of over a decade. The absolutism of claiming 100% domestic supply for all applications is not a realistic argument. As an example, the United States imports soybeans with an over abundant domestic supply. Minerals are no different, rare earth minerals will continue to be imported even after developing an over abundance of supply. Unless the government imposes an embargo on imported rare earths.
Bullshit perfectly sums up your opinions that a significant number of the country doesn’t share. Your opinions are nothing more than that and are absolutely not facts or evidence.
Back to the canned ~~opinion~~ platitude.
Of all my replies all you did was claim they were opinion except for one where you attempted to make a rebuttal but even then created a strawman and cherry-picked to even get the strawman argument.
Your posts have been pathetic and intellectually dishonest.
ChatGPT suggests it would be closer to a decade to hit realistic independence from China. Given we have not even started, I think it would be more than a decade (as I noted originally).
Also, don't change my claim. I never said 100%. My claim of "reasonably self-sufficient " does not in any way mean 100%. Be honest.
Intellectually dishonest perfectly sums up your opinions that are trying to disguise themselves as facts, and failing horribly at it.
But we have started. The Defense Department has already invested $400 million MP Materials to expand production. There hasn't been a deal with Texas Mineral Resources Corp. because the proposed mining operation is still only in the planning stage.
We have not started the initiative I spoke of. The initiative is a big deal and that will require some leadership and funding by Congress and rallying the private sector to pursue this industry.
The fact that we have done some work in this area does not compare to the scale of what I was talking about.