Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Nederlands
Português
The global race for critical minerals—lithium, cobalt, rare earths, and copper—has become the defining geopolitical contest of 2026, reshaping supply chains, national security strategies, and the pace of the energy transition. As demand for electric vehicle batteries, renewable energy storage, and defense technologies surges, the battle for control over critical mineral supply chains has intensified between China, the United States, the European Union, and a growing number of producer nations seeking greater leverage. According to the UNCTAD Global Trade Update published in June 2026, lithium demand is projected to rise by 353% between 2024 and 2040, while graphite demand could increase by more than 130%, underscoring the strategic urgency of securing these resources.
China's Dominance and the 15th Five-Year Plan
China continues to dominate critical mineral processing and refining, controlling approximately 90% of rare earth processing, over 60% of lithium and cobalt refining, and 78% of natural graphite production. The China 15th Five-Year Plan, covering 2026-2030, further entrenches this position by prioritizing strategic mineral exploration, technological innovation in processing, and comprehensive resource utilization. Beijing has also escalated export controls on rare earths and graphite, causing price spikes of up to sixfold outside China. These measures are widely seen as leveraging mineral supply chain dominance to extract strategic concessions, rather than reflecting genuine scarcity.
US Response: FORGE and Project Vault
In February 2026, the United States launched its most ambitious countermeasure yet: the Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement (FORGE), a plurilateral coalition of 55 countries chaired by South Korea, replacing the earlier Minerals Security Partnership. Simultaneously, the U.S. announced Project Vault, a $10 billion public-private Strategic Critical Minerals Reserve funded by the Export-Import Bank and private capital. The 2026 Critical Minerals Ministerial, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance, secured 11 new bilateral agreements with nations including Argentina, Morocco, the Philippines, the UAE, and the UK. The U.S. has committed over $30 billion in total support for critical mineral projects, with coordinated price floors at each production stage to stabilize investment and counter market flooding by dominant producers. The US Critical Minerals Security initiative represents a fundamental shift from multilateral frameworks to bilateral, deal-driven diplomacy.
Domestic Production and Stockpiling
Beyond international partnerships, the U.S. is accelerating domestic mining and processing projects, allocating approximately $2 billion for the National Defense Stockpile and $5 billion for supply chain investments. However, analysts note that building new processing capacity typically requires 10-15 years, creating a narrow window of vulnerability. The Bipartisan Policy Center has highlighted challenges with physical stockpiles, including storage infrastructure needs and potential market destabilization effects.
EU Critical Raw Materials Act: Ambition vs. Financing
The European Union's Critical Raw Materials Act, which came into effect in May 2024, sets ambitious 2030 benchmarks: 10% domestic extraction, 40% domestic processing, and 25% recycling of the EU's annual needs, while ensuring no more than 65% of supply comes from any single third country. In 2026, the EU selected 60 Strategic Projects under the Act and launched the ReSourceEU Action Plan, allocating up to €3 billion ($3.5 billion) for 2026. The European Commission has secured 15 partnership agreements with resource-rich countries and is targeting deals with Brazil, Ukraine, the western Balkans, and North Africa. A new European Critical Raw Materials Centre, modelled on Japan's JOGMEC, will help secure supply through financing, market intelligence, stockpiling, and joint purchasing. However, the EU Critical Raw Materials Act financing gap remains a major concern, with current volumes far below what is needed for meaningful diversification.
Producer Nation Leverage: The Rise of Resource Nationalism
Resource-rich Global South nations are aggressively leveraging their mineral endowments to demand domestic processing, local beneficiation, and higher revenue shares. Indonesia's nickel downstreaming model—banning raw ore exports and attracting over $30 billion in investment—has become a template, despite price crashes and anti-dumping tariffs. Chile is pursuing state-led lithium nationalization with majority government partnerships. The Democratic Republic of Congo imposed cobalt export quotas that doubled prices, while Zimbabwe lifted its lithium ore ban but imposed strict processing requirements. These policies are reshaping global supply chains and creating both opportunities and risks for investors. The producer country leverage in critical minerals is fundamentally altering the terms of trade, with nations now demanding entire industrial ecosystems—refineries, battery plants, and technology transfer—rather than simple cash payments.
New Entrants: Gulf States and the Shifting Landscape
Surprising new actors have entered the critical minerals arena. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are deploying over $100 billion in sovereign wealth fund investments to secure lithium, rare earths, and copper supplies, pivoting from oil to minerals. Their emergence increases competitive pressure on both Western and Chinese-led initiatives, adding a new dimension to the geopolitical contest. The World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2026 ranks geoeconomic confrontation as the top global risk, warning of supply disruptions and price volatility.
Investment Risks and the Narrow Window
The critical minerals race presents significant investment risks, including price volatility, resource nationalism, regulatory uncertainty, and long lead times for new projects. UNCTAD warns that without stronger international cooperation, critical minerals trade risks fragmenting into competing blocs, potentially reinforcing extractive patterns in developing countries rather than supporting structural transformation. Analysts from ODI and other institutions warn of a narrow 12-to-18-month window for Western nations to act decisively before dependencies become structurally entrenched. The critical minerals investment risks 2026 landscape demands careful navigation by both public and private sector actors.
Expert Perspectives
"The critical minerals race is not just about resources—it's about who controls the technologies of the future," says Olena Borodyna, Senior Geopolitical Risks Advisor at ODI. "China's 15th Five-Year Plan will profoundly impact global supply chains, and the window for Western diversification is narrowing rapidly." UNCTAD Secretary-General Rebeca Grynspan has called for a coordinated approach to keep critical mineral trade open, predictable, and beneficial for developing countries, warning that fragmented agreements could raise costs and trap nations in low-value extraction roles.
FAQ
What are critical minerals?
Critical minerals are raw materials essential for national economies and security, with vulnerable supply chains. They include lithium, cobalt, rare earth elements, nickel, graphite, and copper, which are vital for clean energy technologies, electric vehicles, defense systems, and digital infrastructure.
Why is China dominant in critical minerals?
China controls approximately 90% of rare earth processing, over 60% of lithium and cobalt refining, and 78% of natural graphite production. This dominance stems from decades of strategic investment in processing infrastructure, lower environmental standards, and state-backed industrial policy that has created a near-monopoly on mid-stream refining.
What is the US doing to secure critical minerals?
The US launched FORGE (Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement) in February 2026, a coalition of 55 countries, and Project Vault, a $10 billion strategic reserve. It has signed 11 new bilateral agreements and committed over $30 billion in support for critical mineral projects, while accelerating domestic mining and processing.
What are the EU's targets under the Critical Raw Materials Act?
The EU aims for 10% domestic extraction, 40% domestic processing, and 25% recycling of its annual critical raw material needs by 2030, while ensuring no more than 65% of supply comes from any single third country. The Act also establishes a list of 34 critical raw materials and 17 strategic materials.
How are producer nations leveraging their resources?
Countries like Indonesia, Chile, the DRC, and Zimbabwe are imposing export bans, quotas, and domestic processing requirements to capture more value from their mineral wealth. Indonesia's nickel downstreaming model has attracted over $30 billion in investment, while Chile is pursuing state-led lithium nationalization and the DRC has imposed cobalt export quotas.
Conclusion: A Pivotal Moment
The critical minerals race in 2026 represents a pivotal moment for the energy transition and global geopolitics. With demand surging, supply chains concentrated, and producer nations asserting greater control, the actions taken in the next 12-18 months will determine whether the energy transition accelerates or stalls. The US, EU, and their allies face a stark choice between managed dependence, costly independence, or a hybrid approach that combines strategic stockpiles, diversified partnerships, and investment in recycling and substitutes. As UNCTAD's June 2026 Global Trade Update makes clear, without coordinated international action, the critical minerals trade risks fragmenting into competing blocs that could undermine both climate goals and global economic stability.
Follow Discussion