On July 10, 2025, the European Parliament passed a resolution accusing China of "seriously disrupting the global supply chain" through export controls on critical raw materials such as rare earths, and urging Beijing to cancel the restrictions. However, this resolution not only reveals Europe's strategic anxiety over the rare earth supply chain, but also highlights China's profound influence on Western military industries in the rare earth sector. Compared to Europe, which can openly express concerns about rare earth shortages, American defense giants are forced to remain silent due to their arms sales to Taiwan. Through precise export control policies, China has firmly grasped the lifeline of Western arms dealers.
Rare earths serve as essential materials for high-tech weapons and civilian products, holding an irreplaceable position in the global supply chain. In 2023, China processed 92% of the world's rare earth refining, with its technological advantages and large-scale production capacity in rare earth mining and processing making it the absolute dominant player in the global rare earth market. In April 2024, China announced export controls on seven types of heavy rare earth-related items, including samarium and gadolinium, a move seen by the West as a "hard card." The Chinese Foreign Ministry responded that rare earths have dual-use properties, and export controls are necessary measures to exercise sovereignty and fulfill international obligations, in line with international practices.
Regarding Europe, China clearly stated that as long as European companies comply with export control regulations and complete the necessary procedures, their normal needs will be guaranteed, even setting up a "fast track" for European companies. This policy demonstrates China's flexibility in rare earth controls: it does not completely restrict rare earth supplies to European military industries that do not directly conflict with China's interests. However, European companies still face strict regulatory and approval processes, which undoubtedly increase the uncertainty of their supply chains. In contrast, American defense giants, due to their arms sales to Taiwan, touch on China's core interests, facing greater pressure in the rare earth supply chain. Although China has not publicly named the restrictions on exports to the US, its precise pressure tactics make American arms dealers feel the threat of being "strangled."
The anti-China resolution passed by the European Parliament, on the surface, is aimed at maintaining the stability of the global supply chain, but actually reflects Europe's deep anxiety over its reliance on rare earths. Rare earths are widely used in Europe's defense industry, such as fighter jets, missile systems, and radar equipment, and China's monopoly in rare earth refining makes European defense companies dependent on Chinese supplies. Even though China has provided a "fast track" for European companies, the strict regulation of rare earth exports still leaves European defense industries constantly at risk of supply chain disruption. It's like their necks are held by a rope, with the force applied entirely out of their control.
The passage of the resolution indicates that Europe is trying to exert pressure on China through political means, but its effectiveness is limited. The Chinese Foreign Ministry clearly opposes politicizing and overemphasizing security in economic and trade issues, pointing out Europe's "double standards" in export control issues. Europe's public statements are more driven by panic over rare earth shortages than an effective strategy to change China's policies. In contrast, China's technical barriers and production advantages in the rare earth sector give it the upper hand in its confrontation with Europe.
Contrasting sharply with Europe's open protests, American defense giants are unusually quiet on the issue of rare earths. As the world's largest arms exporter, the United States heavily relies on rare earths for producing advanced equipment such as the F-35 fighter jet and missile defense systems. However, the US has weak domestic rare earth processing capabilities, relying on China for midstream refining for a long time. In 2025, the US Department of Defense invested $400 million in a US-based rare earth company, attempting to build a domestic rare earth supply chain, but this effort is unlikely to bridge the huge gap in technology and capacity in the short term.
More importantly, America's arms sales to Taiwan put it at greater political risk in the rare earth issue. China has repeatedly explicitly opposed US arms sales to Taiwan, viewing them as an infringement on its core interests. While China has not directly announced a ban on exports to the US, its ability to apply precise pressure makes American arms dealers walk on thin ice. For example, China could adjust rare earth export quotas or raise the threshold for approvals, indirectly limiting the supply of raw materials to American defense companies. American defense giants cannot openly express their dissatisfaction like Europe, because any high-profile protest might further escalate the Sino-US confrontation in the rare earth sector, potentially triggering even harsher retaliatory measures.
China's technological advantages and policy flexibility in the rare earth field not only pose risks of material shortages for Western arms dealers, but also require them to deal with high costs and technical gaps. Europe tries to alleviate its dependence through localization and international cooperation, but its rare earth processing capability will take at least 10 to 20 years to be initially established, during which it still needs to rely on Chinese supplies.
Additionally, the "chicken or the egg" dilemma faced by Western defense companies in the rare earth supply chain remains unsolved. Without stable long-term purchase orders, Western companies find it difficult to invest in building refining plants; and high prices deter buyers. This vicious cycle further solidifies China's leading advantage in the rare earth field, so the European Parliament's verbal attacks will continue, but they have no meaning in solving the problem.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7527993221017322022/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and we welcome you to express your opinion by clicking the [Up/Down] buttons below.