‘Global race for critical raw materials is about power’ – Commission

The global race for critical raw materials is no longer about mineral access, but about power, the head of the European Commission’s department for international partnerships, Koen Doens, said on Wednesday, amid the bloc’s high dependence on China.

The senior Commission official’s remarks come as the European Union is struggling to diversify its supply of critical raw materials, deemed crucial for the development of clean technologies. EU auditors have recently warned that the bloc risks undermining a successful energy transition while remaining highly dependent on China.

“Power will rest in the hands of those that control extraction, refining, processing, transport standards, financing, and ultimately industrial capacity,” Doens told an audience at the EIT Raw Materials Summit in Brussels.

The Belgian official argued that in the race towards climate neutrality, minerals like lithium, cobalt and graphite have the same strategic value as oil and gas did in the 20th century, citing increased geopolitical interest over rare earths. He argued that strategic autonomy is not a defensive cost but a vital investment in the EU’s long-term economic resilience.

“Paying a premium for security today ensures we are not held hostage to supply shocks tomorrow,” Doens said. The real challenge, he warned, is about building supply chains from mine to market to truly secure an EU strategic autonomy.

EU’s strategy on critical raw materials

With the goal to boost solar panels, batteries or wind turbines production, the EU set out domestic targets to increase the availability of critical raw materials by 2030 — 10% of extraction, 40% of refining and 15% of recycling — under rules adopted in 2024.

However, some key raw materials, such as rare earth metals, which are not found in Europe, prompted the bloc to forge 16 partnerships to date with various nations, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Africa, the United States, and Zambia.

These deals were agreed under the EU’s strategic plan to invest in infrastructure abroad, the so-called Global Gateway, which aims to compete with China’s Belt and Road Initiative despite significant budgetary differences.

“We can no longer afford to export risk, import dependency, and hope that the market alone will guarantee security of supply,” Doens added, implicitly referring to China’s global dominance on the entire critical raw materials supply chain.

“Nor can we limit our ambition to securing access to raw materials, raw material mines, while others dominate refining, processing, manufacturing and technology,” he added.

Dismantling China’s dominance

China accounts for 60% of global production of critical raw materials and 90% of refining capacity, and according to the European Parliament’s research department, the EU collectively depends on Beijing for roughly 90% of its raw materials and 98% of its rare-earth magnets. In recent years, most recently in 2025, Beijing has repeatedly halted or restricted exports of rare earths to the EU.

Looking to address dependencies, the think tank European Union Institute for Security Studies (EU ISS) proposed creating an “allied industrial bloc” rather than “trading partners” designed to reduce exposure to Chinese leverage.

“The coalition should extend an open invitation to non-rival countries to join, provided they adopt the same protections. The focus should be on material producers or deposit holders like Malaysia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Brazil and Indonesia and countries with large skilled workforces like India,” reads the EU ISS paper.

Considering that the real source of Chinese dominance is not just mining but the ability to refine and process materials at an industrial scale, the EU ISS paper suggests Europe should also invest heavily in domestic refining infrastructure, even if environmental standards and labor costs make it less competitive in the short term.

The study also argues that Europe needs strategic reserves of critical minerals, in the same way that states maintain oil reserves or military ammunition depots. The proposal is backed by hypothetical scenarios like sudden embargoes, Taiwan escalation or supply collapses.

Perhaps the most contentious idea penned by the EU ISS is that Europe should move faster than democratic systems would prefer. The study often refers to permitting delays, fragmented regulation and environmental approval processes as incompatible with the “geopolitical urgency”.

In a bid to speed up the extraction of domestic critical raw materials, the Commission has recently proposed opening up recently adopted EU water rules, under what it dubbed a “de-risking strategy” to diversify supply.

Critical raw materials extraction, refining, and recycling activities are closely linked to water use and water quality.

The Commission decision to reopen the Water Framework Directive prompted 27 lawmakers to send a letter to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and other Commissioners, citing growing water stress, declining water quality and increasing climate-related risks.

“Reopening the cornerstone of the Union’s water legislation risks sending the wrong signal to citizens, to investors and to all those working to implement EU law on the ground,” reads the MEPs’ letter.

But the EU executive seems determined to continue the road of environmental deregulation to boost the bloc’s competitiveness.

“We must identify the key projects, cut through administrative delays, mobilise public and private finance and show that Europe can put on the table a superior, more sustainable and interesting offer to others,” said Commission official Doens.