WIREDGOV

EXPERT COMMENT

The US wants to establish supply chains for critical minerals free of Chinese control. Disrespecting sovereignty and international law will isolate the country from the partners it needs to achieve this ambition.

Following US action in Venezuela, and in the context of President Donald Trump’s continuing imperialistic rhetoric on Greenland, the strategic context for critical minerals in 2026 has shifted in a radical way.

Trump’s emphasis on spheres of influence as his administration’s primary foreign policy creates an alarming risk with respect to its policy on natural resources: that genuine concerns about the resilience of critical minerals supply chains will be used to add a veneer of commercial or strategic reasoning for aggressive foreign policy moves. 

On 14 January, Trump announced that he will personally negotiate agreements with foreign nations to secure minerals supplies. The priority the president places on reliable supply chains is understandable. And a US strategy built on international partnership and targeted market interventions will lead to resilience, by balancing national production and international diversification. 

But the Trump administration’s ambitions in Greenland indicate disregard for matters of sovereignty and international law. That will undermine efforts at building partnerships and contribute to market volatility and divergence – at a time of significant variability of supply constraints across different commodities that will continue through 2026.

Click here to continue reading the full version of this Expert Comment on the Chatham House website.