【By Guan察者网 Liu Bai】 Again, it's about throwing money into development, and forming cliques to create small groups. The Trump administration has been making continuous moves over the past few months, each targeting China's absolute dominance in critical minerals.
On February 4th, local time, the United States gathered senior officials from over 50 countries in Washington for a ministerial meeting on critical minerals, and officially launched a plan called the "Resource Geopolitical Strategic Partnership Forum" (FORGE), proposing to set a minimum price for critical minerals and establish a so-called "Preferred Trade Group for Critical Minerals". Although the purpose is as clear as the sun in the sky, the US side still claims that this move aims to ensure supply chain resilience against shocks and price "coercion", not to form an exclusive group, implying it is not aimed at China.
According to a report by Hong Kong's English media, the South China Morning Post on February 5th, a senior US official defended this new initiative on critical minerals, stating that promoting supply chain diversification is a national security measure, not an attempt to form an exclusive group as claimed by China.
US State Department Deputy Spokesperson Minion Houston delivered a speech the day after the launch of the "Resource Geopolitical Strategic Partnership Forum", saying that this globally coordinated action on strategic minerals led by the US is a "prudent move".
She avoided the statement that the forum was aimed at China. "Our core objective is indeed focused on supply chain diversification, which can play a role when supply disruptions occur such as during the pandemic. These are prudent global measures..."
"In a broad sense, it is also an important step in maintaining national security," she added. "By achieving global supply chain diversification, we can avoid risks from such supply disruptions or price coercion."
On February 4th, the United States convened a key mineral summit with more than 50 countries' ministers in Washington.
From defense systems, industrial robots to washing machines, the manufacturing of various products relies on critical mineral raw materials.
US Secretary of State Rubio chaired the 2026 Ministerial Meeting on Key Minerals in Washington on the 4th, with representatives from 54 countries and the EU attending. The US announced the launch of the "Resource Geopolitical Strategic Partnership Forum" at the meeting.
According to a situation statement released by the US Department of State on the evening of the 4th, the forum will be presided over by South Korea until June, building upon the 2019 Mineral Security Partnership, aiming to coordinate policies and projects, and build a diversified, resilient, and secure supply chain.
That day, the US signed 11 new bilateral frameworks and memoranda of understanding on key minerals with countries such as Argentina, Cook Islands, Ecuador, Guinea, Morocco, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, UAE, and Uzbekistan. To establish a leading position in global key mineral diplomacy, the US has completed negotiations with another 17 countries.
During the meeting, US Vice President Vance proposed establishing a preferential trade zone for key minerals among allies, setting collaborative floor prices through adjustable tariffs to prevent dumping. This proposal did not directly name China.
Houston boasted, "The US has shown unprecedented leadership in key mineral diplomacy, signing 11 new agreements in a single day, laying the foundation for building a fairer and safer supply chain."
Regarding the US's so-called "key mineral alliance", Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian responded at a regular press conference on the 5th, stating that maintaining an open, inclusive, and普惠 international trade environment aligns with the common interests of all countries. All parties have a responsibility to play a constructive role in maintaining the stability and security of the global supply chain for key minerals. At the same time, we oppose any country using "small circle" rules to disrupt the international economic and trade order.
Houston also mentioned recent interactions between the two governments. She said that cooperation on issues like the fentanyl crisis has achieved significant results.
Although the US is trying to restructure the map of the key mineral supply chain through a series of diplomatic combinations, the reality is much more complex, and its allies often show more pragmatic and complex attitudes in strategic choices.
Some allies are concerned that getting closer to Washington may provoke retaliation from China.
For example, South Korea joined the US-led so-called "Key Mineral Alliance" just before, but then publicly stated that it is seeking to strengthen cooperation with China on the key mineral supply chain.
The South Korean Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Energy issued a "Comprehensive Countermeasures for Rare Earth Supply Chain" on the 5th, stating that it needs to strengthen cooperation with China through multiple channels. The ministry stated in a statement that it would establish a hotline and joint committee mechanism with Chinese authorities to assist South Korean companies in importing Chinese mineral resources more quickly and stably.
On January 13, 2026, rare earth mineral specimens were exhibited at a museum in Beijing. IC Photo
In response, Houston claimed that building collective resilience is necessary.
"Our current focus is to continue the momentum generated by yesterday's ministerial meeting... This collaboration network will develop timelines, milestones, and specific follow-up action strategies," Houston said. "We look forward to seeing tangible results, initiatives that focus on practical outcomes, consultations among partners, and jointly determining the expected milestones and next steps for this collaboration mechanism."
The US is mobilizing a large amount of resources to support this action. According to data from the US Department of State, over the past six months, the US has committed over $3 billion in letters of intent, investments, loans, and other forms of support in partnership with the private sector. Relevant measures include the US Export-Import Bank funding a $1 billion "Vault Program" to establish domestic strategic reserves, and the US Department of Energy providing tens of billions of dollars in loans and conditional commitments for lithium, cobalt, graphite, rare earths, and other projects in the US and Australia.
Despite this, the US faces significant challenges in reducing its reliance on China, as China holds a dominant position in the mining and processing of critical minerals. Australian and US experts previously predicted that it would take 10 to 20 years for the US to establish a safe and independent supply chain.
The Wall Street Journal also admitted that China's restrictive measures on key mineral exports have, to some extent, spurred the recovery of Western industries. However, regardless of the time needed to rebuild the supply chain, the industry has already experienced multiple "false booms." The fact is that compared to China, the West lacks experience and professional expertise.
A report jointly released by the Council on Foreign Relations and the think tank "Silvano Policy Accelerator" on the 5th stated that due to China's monopoly in the industry, the US cannot surpass China simply by expanding the scale of mineral mining and processing.
The report argues that the US government must promote technological innovation, resource recycling, and the development of alternative materials to "offset China's dominant advantage," creating a more efficient, cleaner, and more resilient supply chain.
The report states: "Expanding traditional mineral mining and processing alone is far from enough."
"The US should scale up disruptive innovation and resource recycling efforts to reduce reliance on China, while strengthening cooperation among allies in emerging mineral technologies."
This article is exclusive to Observer Network. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7603566402590622217/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author.