The moment is now. If there was one major theme from this week’s Critical Minerals & National Security Hill Summit, it was the urgency and importance of acting now to derisk critical minerals supply chains before it is too late. Bringing together industry entrepreneurs, allies, and members of Congress, there was stark alignment on the national, economic, and energy security stakes. Moreover, there was alignment on the necessity for strategic policies and plans, innovation, and collaboration to not just catch up but change the game. In short, the era of mineral naivete is over.
Critical Mineral Dominance & Weaponization
Critical minerals are foundational to modern technologies and defense systems. Throughout the Summit, every panel highlighted China’s expansive dominance in critical minerals across the entire value chain from extraction to refining to processing. China controls over half of global mining production and 90% of refining capacity.
This is not simply good fortune of a resource-rich sovereign territory, but was achieved through decades of price manipulation, state subsidies, Belt and Road investments, and tight control over the knowledge and expertise required across the value chain. For instance, two decades ago, China accounted for roughly 50% of the production of sintered permanent magnets that are critical for technologies ranging from cars to data centers and defense systems. Today, China controls 94% of the production.
This market dominance is a source of power that China can weaponize. In 2010, China blocked rare earth exports to Japan following a maritime clash over the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. Last December, China banned the export of several critical minerals to the US amid growing trade tensions, following up on early moves to curb exports earlier that year. These export controls expanded in April and October 2025 to additional critical minerals and related products, equipment, and technologies, respectively.
Although some of these controls were rolled back in November, the policy remains vague, and export controls persist for any military end user. In this week’s announcement that China would actively grant new licenses for critical minerals, a Chinese Commerce Ministry spokesperson added the caveat that licenses would be granted, “As long as the export applications are for legitimate civilian use and are compliant.” For those panelists at the Summit, there was consensus to treat the reprieve on export controls as a pause, warning that China has demonstrated a willingness to use this tool at will.
The Moment is Now
Within this backdrop, numerous panels and perspectives brought to bear expansive domain and policy expertise, and honed in a few key themes to address this significant risk.
- Collaboration is key: No country or organization can dig out of this dependency alone. There was widespread alignment on the necessity for collaboration from US allies in Australia, Norway, and Canada, across political parties, and among public and private sector alike. This collaboration must expand globally through mutually beneficial partnerships that not only provide access to the critical minerals but deny China that same access. The recent US-Australia critical minerals agreement is representative of the growing multi-lateral movement. As Senator Todd Young noted, while independence may be the buzzword, what we really need is mutually beneficial cooperation while also derisking from adversaries.
- Market intervention is needed: Chinese price gauging and manipulation have created a lopsided market. In times of national interest, some market intervention is temporarily needed. The panels discussed a range of options, from recent US government equity stakes in strategic companies to price floors to export controls to tariffs (just not on allies, per the first bullet). For example, the US government has entered strategic partnerships with Intel, Nvidia, Advanced Micro Devices, and Nippon Steel, highlighting a growing emphasis on state-fostered investments and partnerships. Similarly, the recent launch of the Genesis Mission reflects a whole-of-government approach by the US to win the AI race, with critical mineral access and control as a key component.
- Innovation, innovation, innovation: From recycling existing technologies to innovations across the value chain, the panels together viewed technological innovation as the main course. But innovation doesn’t stop there; it must extend into the policy realm too. In the US, several bipartisan bills such as the Strategic Minerals Act have been introduced, and the necessity of a critical minerals plan that feeds into a national economic security policy surfaced numerous times. In the EU, a proposed export control blocks the export of waste containing critical minerals with the intent to recycle them for technologies such as magnets, while also funding critical minerals projects.
- Changing the game (on every level): In national security, the phrase ‘left of boom’ refers to taking proactive measures to mitigate a crisis or event before it occurs. On one panel, this phrase was repurposed to ‘left of tech’, highlighting the necessity to include strategies on recycling and other green innovations as a core part of any derisking and innovation strategy. For example, the Ames National Laboratory at Iowa State has partnered with Microsoft, Western Digital and critical minerals recycling companies to shred end-of-life hard disk drives into several key critical minerals. In addition, changing the narrative on core aspects of critical minerals, such as mining, is essential for greater public support. Senator John Hickenlooper argued for shifting the national narrative to instead highlight how mining is not only essential for derisking our supply chains, but also in fighting climate change.
Critical Minerals Will Dominate 2026
On December 1, the Department of Energy announced a $134 million investment into the domestic rare earth elements supply chain. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright explained, “For too long, the United States has relied on foreign nations for the minerals and materials that power our economy.” The stakes are well understood and there is consensus across allies, political parties, and the private and public sectors that time is of the essence.
As the executive director of the International Energy Agency warned, “We may well see in the case of critical minerals the nightmare we had in the 1970s for oil.” Against such dire warnings, an inspirational theme emerged throughout the Summit: the US needs to double down on the entrepreneurship, innovation, and grit that make it unique. Allies and partners are also essential. Instead of distinct and disparate critical mineral plans, harmonization across like-minded countries is needed to make significant progress in a short window. Critical minerals are not just a commodity issue, they are a national and economic security issue and a sovereignty issue.
Additional interos.ai analysis regarding critical minerals is one part of our 2026 predictions report coming soon. Keep an eye out for it and greater details on critical minerals, geopolitics, economic transformations, and climate change within an era of significant global transitions and technological upheaval.