On February 5, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs released the "Joint Statement of the U.S., EU and Japan Critical Minerals Ministerial Meeting," which is in English. For ease of understanding, I have translated a Chinese version using software.
First, let me explain the background of this meeting. On February 4 (yesterday), Secretary of State Rubio of the United States held the "First Critical Minerals Ministerial Meeting" in Washington, D.C., with more than 50 countries. The main objectives of this meeting are three:
First, to build a "China-free" critical mineral supply chain by uniting more than 50 countries;
Second, to connect with the U.S. $12 billion "Treasury Plan" strategic reserve;
Third, to strengthen the U.S. resource dominance in key industries such as new energy and semiconductors globally.
What exactly does the joint statement of this ministerial meeting (Figure 3) say? I will summarize it in two parts:
First part: They aim to reach a memorandum within the next 30 days to enhance the security of critical minerals. This can be understood as the meeting being merely a "meeting," without reaching any agreement. The following 30 days will be when they focus on negotiating how to cooperate.
Second part: Specific cooperation matters include establishing resource exchange, technology collaboration, tariff exemptions, and potential price coordination mechanisms.
For Japan, the biggest gain from this meeting is reaching a cooperation intention with so-called "like-minded countries" on critical mineral issues, which has been something that Takahashi Hanae has long desired.
So, how should we view this meeting and their joint statement?
Firstly, according to reports from European media, this meeting was not as smooth as described by Japan and the U.S. Due to tariff and Greenland issues, most European countries are skeptical about the U.S. initiative. They are cautious about the U.S. framework of "bypassing China."
Secondly, the U.S. proposed to link this meeting with its $12 billion "Treasury Plan" strategic reserve. In other words, the U.S. wants to invest $12 billion to stockpile critical minerals like rare earths, but now these funds need to be shared among all. Trump's plan is very clever, but currently, cooperation between European countries and China in the field of critical minerals is still smooth. Why would they spend huge amounts of money to support the U.S.?
Finally, the U.S. clearly aims to seize the voice in the critical mineral sector through this meeting. Europe now emphasizes "independent autonomy," avoiding complete reliance on the U.S. Therefore, the results of the meeting are far from ideal.
In my opinion, the so-called "First Critical Minerals Ministerial Meeting" by the U.S. does not involve "resource complementarity" among participating countries, but rather a "shared demand" relationship. To put it bluntly, they already have intense competition among themselves. Unless they all face the problem of "disruption" in critical minerals, they are easily vulnerable to being picked off one by one. From reaching consensus to technical cooperation and resource development, there is still a long way to go. We can use this time to gain more strategic initiative.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1856255020459015/
Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.