The Trump administration sees critical minerals as the new oil. Copper, lithium, rare earth elements, and graphite have become essential inputs for everything from batteries, electric grid equipment, semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, and a growing range of energy technologies. Administration officials argue that America’s dependence on global supply chains—particularly those linked to China—has become a strategic vulnerability that could constrain economic growth, energy development, and national security. “We have to make sure that China isn’t in control of the supply chains when it comes to critical minerals,” said Jarrod Eagan, executive director of the National Energy Dominance Council (NEDC). “Early on in the Trump administration, we were raising alarms, and I think you’ve had a wake-up call here in the U.S.”
The urgency stems from both rising demand and concentrated supply. Data centers, electric transmission projects, defense systems, batteries, and advanced manufacturing all require large quantities of critical minerals. At the same time, China dominates processing capacity for many of the minerals used in modern technologies. While mining may occur in countries around the world, refining and processing often take place in China, creating concerns among policymakers that supply disruptions could have broad economic consequences.
The domestic policy goal is accelerating development.
The administration’s first major policy action came on March 20, 2025, when President Trump signed an executive order titled “Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production.” The order directed federal agencies to take steps to accelerate domestic mineral production, citing national security concerns and dependence on foreign suppliers. The administration has followed up on that commitment though a series of actions to accelerate domestic production and build a network of allied nations to secure future supplies. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has argued that the United States possesses abundant mineral resources but faces regulatory and permitting barriers that slow project development, making it harder to compete with foreign suppliers.
Permitting reform has become a central element of the administration’s strategy. In April 2025, the White House announced the first wave of critical mineral projects selected for expedited federal review. Several mining projects were added to the FAST-41 permitting process, a federal framework designed to improve coordination among agencies and provide greater transparency and predictability for major infrastructure projects. Administration officials argued that lengthy permitting timelines have discouraged investment and contributed to America’s dependence on foreign mineral supplies.
The administration proposed nearly $1 billion in support for domestic critical minerals and materials development through programs administered by the Department of Energy. Proposed funding areas include mineral extraction, processing, recycling, battery supply chains, and technologies designed to reduce dependence on foreign suppliers. Administration officials have repeatedly linked these investments to broader efforts to strengthen domestic manufacturing and national security.
Michael Bruce, a partner at venture capital firm Emerson Collective, said more needs to be done to encourage investor confidence in domestic projects, citing the need for consistent policy signals across federal agencies. “We’re still in the early innings of letting the dust settle and getting a stable federal policy signal that investors really can count on,” Bruce said.
Not everyone agrees that faster permitting and expanded domestic production are the answer. Environmental groups have raised concerns about the impacts of mining projects on public lands and water resources. And opening new mines can take years or even decades, meaning that policy changes today are unlikely to translate into substantial new production in the near term.
But administration officials increasingly argue that domestic mining alone cannot solve the problem. Building alternative supply chains will require cooperation with countries that possess significant mineral resources and processing capacity.
International efforts focus on coalition-building.
On February 4, Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted the inaugural Critical Minerals Ministerial at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C. The gathering brought together representatives from 54 countries and the European Commission. Rubio argued that secure mineral supply chains are essential to economic and national security and called for greater cooperation among producing and consuming nations.
The meeting launched a new international framework known as the Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement (FORGE) which administration officials describe as the next phase of U.S. efforts to reduce dependence on China.
Industry leaders have long argued that the volatility of mineral markets—and the ability of dominant suppliers to drive prices lower—can discourage investment in new mines and processing facilities outside China. Vice President JD Vance echoed that concern at the Critical Minerals Ministerial, arguing that consistent investment in critical mineral industries is “nearly impossible” when pricing is erratic and foreign supplies can flood the market before new projects can get off the ground. Participants in FORGE are exploring whether long-term purchasing agreements, coordinated investment strategies, and other mechanisms could provide greater certainty for investors.
While earlier U.S. initiatives focused on support for individual mining and processing projects, FORGE seeks to foster broader coordination among a set of mineral-producing and mineral-consuming nations. An early success of the FORGE framework was the April 2026 U.S.-EU critical minerals partnership signed by Rubio and EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič.
Looking ahead
The ultimate measure of success will not be the number of executive orders issued or international meetings convened, but whether the United States and its allies can build supply chains that are economically competitive, resilient, and less dependent on China. That process will take years, and significant obstacles remain.
Still, the administration’s actions have elevated critical minerals from a niche policy issue to a central pillar of U.S. industrial and energy strategy. As companies make long-term decisions about manufacturing, energy infrastructure, technology development, and supply chains, the competition to secure critical minerals may prove to be one of the defining economic contests of the coming decade.
