The United States' critical minerals security policies in the context of neomercantilism and their impact on global geological studies

In the field of science, there is a need for a more comprehensive assessment of the potential geopolitical impacts of the transition to renewable energy. The combination of risk-prone situations such as depleting mineral resources, increasing environmental problems, rising geopolitical risks, and regional and global conflict potentials with the energy transition’s intense demand for critical minerals has made uninterrupted access to critical minerals a highly sensitive issue for the countries’ national security. The importance of these minerals, which are also heavily used in sophisticated weapon systems and ammunition, is increasing day by day. Recent events such as trade disputes between countries, resource nationalism, the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine War, US President Trump’s demand to “annex” Greenland and Canada for critical minerals deposits, the US-Ukraine Minerals Deal that ensures the control of US on the critical minerals deposits of Ukraine, and the US-China trade war depending on REE’s and critical minerals have made the risk of disruption to the global economy and security even more apparent. This situation has placed critical minerals in a sensitive position in the global political economy, necessitating a reassessment of the mutual economic and political relations between the major global economies of the 21st century and resource-rich developing countries. In this process, developed countries need to enter into a new economic structure with resource-rich countries in order to maintain their prosperity and national security. The ideological divisions of the Cold War era are giving way to new alliances based on economic and technological superiority. On the other hand, due to the vital importance of critical minerals, especially for leading economic and military powers such as the US, EU, China, Russia, Japan, and India, any disruptions these countries may experience in the access of critical minerals or mutual interventions between parties in resource-rich countries carry the risk of large-scale conflict worldwide.

Protectionist, control-oriented, import-substitutionist, and divisive policies are those that most countries have implemented or have been forced to contend with regarding “critical minerals.” This situation, which has led to a resurgence of resource nationalism worldwide, also signals the beginning of a new “mercantilist” era from a global perspective. These policies, reflect the fundamental characteristics of neo-mercantilism, have formed the main axis of many countries’ “critical minerals” strategies, especially since 2016. Moreover, the United States, one of the most important advocates of economic liberalism, is leading this new era globally. The US’s national interests are driving the country to pursue neomercantilist strategies regarding critical minerals. These strategies leave other countries with no choice but to either align with the policies they contain or respond to the US with similar counter-policies. In today’s climate of international insecurity, the implementation of neo-mercantilist policies on critical minerals is becoming a necessity rather than a choice for countries. Developments in the coming period will determine whether critical minerals will be a vital aid for the clean energy transition or a bottleneck for world politics and economics due to access risks. Geologists and policymakers will need to work together on this issue.