The Chinese government has introduced a slew of new measures designed to tighten its grip on lucrative natural resources used in everything from electric cars to wind turbines. In a list released by the country’s State Council on Saturday, Beijing declared that rare earth metals are the property of the state and warned “no organization or person may encroach on or destroy rare-earth resources.” From Oct. 1, when the rules come into force, the government will operate a rare earth traceability database to ensure it can control the extraction, use and export of the metals. China currently produces around 60 percent of the world’s rare earth metals, and is the origin of around 90 percent of refined rare earths on the market. Advertisement
Beijing has already prohibited exports of rare earth refining and magnet manufacturing technologies. In January, it banned the export of gallium and germanium, both highly sought after by the computer-chip industry. Fears that China is looking to exert control over the industry, and could disrupt critical technology, automotive and renewable energy supply chains, have sparked a race to shore up supplies from alternative suppliers. Both the U.S. and the EU have launched efforts to procure rare earths at home and abroad, including in Vietnam, Brazil and Australia. A year ago, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced construction of the first large-scale rare earth refinery outside of Asia, located in Estonia. She said the move would “bolster European resilience and security of supply.”
A 2022 analysis from the European Parliament warned that over-reliance on monopolistic suppliers was a major risk for Europe. “The EU imports 93 percent of its magnesium from China, 98 percent of its borate from Turkey, and 85 percent of its niobium from Brazil. Russia produces 40 percent of the world’s palladium,” it said. “The latter is a reminder of the strategic implications of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the need for the EU to prepare for an increasingly uncertain world.”
The EU has launched a probe into anti-competitive trading allegations against the Chinese electric vehicle market, which benefits from heavy government subsidies and preferential access to essential rare earth metals. Earlier this month, the two sides agreed they would host consultations in order to try and resolve the standoff.
That last paragraph really is so damning. It is admitting the superiority of China’s central planning and how it is being used to actually improve society. ”But at what cost?”
Well, apparently the cost is that shares of China’s largest rare earth mineral mining firm have gone up 5% since the announcement. China proving socialists right every single day and absolutely crushing the capitalist development speedrun challenge. It’s genuinely hilarious that the development plan of China runs basically like what I’ll describe below, and capitalist nations are just completely incapable of stopping it from happening because the power of capital is greater than the power of their states.
“hmmm yes, today I will invest in the Chinese rare earth mineral market. Since China controls 90% of global production and all of the infrastructure is in place, all I have to do is bring my money, tech, and expertise with me and I’ll carve myself some serious profit! Easy money!”
“Ahh yes thank you for the help developing our mining industry/technology Mr. Foreign Capital. We appreciate your business and you had a great run, but unfortunately for you we have nationalized your mineral resources. The extractive capitalism will now stop. Feel free to reinvest elsewhere or compete with us on the global market tho :)”
”China is nationalizing its rare earth minerals, but at what cost? We need to ban China from–“
”Wait omg is that another investment opportunity in China where I can bring in my capital/technology/expertise to make some money? Hell yeah, where do I sign?”
Rinse and repeat
They come about explicitly because they don’t let moral considerations impinge on the strategic needs of defeating capitalism. That means no Iron Curtain, no bloc enforcement, no hard resistance based on ideology. It means letting American businesses come in, abuse their people, pollute their land and air and water. It means letting American politicians come and go and feel superior. The entire strategy is play to Western and capitalist hubris and let them take all the actions that will be their undoing.
If you think its just about morality than you’re being entirely superficial about it.
China is hypocritical because they hope the same fascists they deal with will honor their business deals. It only works until it doesn’t but as far as I can see if China is not willing to help the global south by taking the bare minimal critical stances towards their enemies then China will lose their claim as their ally.
Not everyone is willing to drink this Chinese koolaid. China has failed on Israel. Its as simple as that, and its not even bringing up their historical deals(e.g BRICS investment in Israel IT).
If it helps you to sleep at night and have this insiduous double standards on the CPC can do no wrong, please do it with the understanding you’re not speaking for everyone. China will create enemies if they don’t sort out their hypocrisy should be a room temperature take.
You’re saying China doesn’t have to fight a battle it can’t win but that it has to adopt a moral stance that is equivalent to it. It’s a liberal moral mindset. China is incredibly strategic and cautious in its foreign policy because it knows just how bad the fascists can make things. China can’t do anything about Palestine except as part of a broad coalition and China can’t lead that coalition because as much as you think “words don’t have power, but you still have to say them”, building international voices against USA’s military interests is high risk low reward.
China can’t fix the world’s problems, so why should we expect it to do anything about Palestine? Because it can or because it’s the right thing to do? Let go of the moral positioning.
China is instead building literal material capabilities and infrastructure all over the world and this is far far above the bare minimum. The fact that China isn’t “speaking out” while literally doing the most any country has ever done for building power in Africa and South America is something that isn’t going to make a lot of enemies except of ultras and libs
You’re saying China doesn’t have to fight a battle it can’t win but that it has to adopt a moral stance that is equivalent to it.
I refuse this premise from the start. Why are you assuming that
1- The bare minimal political and economic sanctions against Israel leads them to “a battle they can’t win”. What is this Israel is a shithole with not even an army for themselves. How long would they survive without the nukes and America support?
2- The US doesn’t need excuses to fight China, they’re already doing that. Whatever China does towards Israel is not going to move the needle on US-China relations at all.
You should be aware this is literaly the exact argument people use to suppress leftist organizations. “Oh if we push for X policy then the fascists will start hunting us down and fighting us in the open” even though they’re always doing that and capitalists don’t need excuses to fight the left.
China can’t do anything about Palestine except as part of a broad coalition and China can’t lead that coalition because as much as you think “words don’t have power, but you still have to say them”, building international voices against USA’s military interests is high risk low reward.
Nonsense. I’m not laying it on them to solve the crisis. I’m laying it on them to do the bare minimum from their side.
BTW I’ll quote you from the article you clearly didn’t read where Vijay Pashrad literaly counters this exact argument. Please I beg you, forget this whole comment chain and just go and read that, please I’d rather have that than pointless arguing. We are literaly talking about bare minimal gestures. Anything, literaly anything beyond just speeches at the UN. China has done nothing and if you think that is a compelling argument by communists towards the oppressed people global south then you’re out of touch, sorry.
“Ah yes the literal soon to be global superpower, surpassing the US in every metric, obviously clearly can’t lift a finger to defend global south interests.” This is not a reasonable position.
Again read the Prashad quotes, he was asking for the bare minimum, not some amphibious assault war against Israel.
But that killing could be stopped with some practical solutions, according to Vijay Prashad, historian and director of the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research. He said permanent members of the Security Council, including China, could bring forward proposals similar to those imposed on Libya during the civil war of 2011.
“To stop the bombing, China can put forward a motion for a no-fly zone over Gaza and have Egypt monitor the flights over the area,” Prashad said. “It can also propose a full arms embargo – not even dual-use technology [goods, software and technology that can be used for both civilian and military applications] should be allowed to be shipped to Israel.”
Prashad said the fact that member states were not offering such motions was “perplexing” and “part of our colonial sensibility” that the UN’s agenda could not be set by non-Western states, who were not traditionally the decision-makers.
“There are moments like when the Chinese representative to the UN [Zhang Jun] stopped the Israeli ambassador from talking in a very undignified way – so it’s not like people aren’t asserting themselves, but why not assert themselves with a resolution?” Prashad acknowledged that the proposals would likely be vetoed by the US, making Washington appear “even more complicit in the massacre than they are right now”.
Pointless arguments are when commentators and pundits claim to understand the entirety of the geopolitical situation better than the countries who have been prosecuting that situation for centuries. You do realize that a no-fly zone literally means shooting down military aircraft, right? A no-fly zone is a escalatory move against a US proxy. That’s not the bare minimum, that’s literally violence in a conflict that China cannot win.
You’re also speaking for the entirety of the global south when you say you think everyone sees China as both capable of doing anything about the conflict and also that if they don’t then all of the other investment they make in the global south can be ignored as just meaningless. Forgive me if I don’t think you speak for everyone.
As for China beating the USA on every metric, it’s just not true. China is trending towards beating the USA on every metric and will overtake the USA on most metrics eventually. But the USA still has significant material advantages over China, some that China will never surpass. The most important ones to this conversation are:
- number of forward military bases
- number of military bases in foreign countries
- number of military colonies
- number of nukes used in combat
- number of nukes available to launch
- nuke travel time in minutes to major military, government, and civilian targets
- number of separatist movements infiltrated by a foreign government
- number of genocidal allies actively seeking ways to kill more civilians
Among others. No, China is not an impervious super power. It absolutely has a lot to lose right now that would throw it off the course it has been on to cultivate a socialist experiment that will last longer than the Russian one as we all try to figure out the right path towards communism. You seem to think you have it all figured out. You seem to imagine you can pass judgment on China when you have none of their military intelligence, none of their diplomatic relationships, none of their risks, and none of their strategic analysis.
But really, all you need to say was that you think a no-fly zone enforced by fucking Egypt at the behest of China is a bare minimum stance and we could have ended this conversation before it started, because clearly you don’t live in the real world. I love Vijay, but he’s not talking about undermining the Chinese communist project, he’s inhabiting a very important role in leftist critique to push the dialogue in the right direction. You sound like an ultra, he sounds like a theorist and a pundit. There’s a big difference.
