taz: Ms. Mildner, the US government wants to forge a global coalition to break China’s dominance in the processing of rare earths. Should the European Union join in?
Stormy-Annika Mildner: It’s good that the EU is at the table. The Trump administration’s initiative serves two major goals, namely to become independent of China in terms of industrial and security policy. To this end, the USA has launched various projects, for example a strategic raw materials reserve and the raw materials alliance. Raw materials policy is a central component of the America First agenda and is firmly embedded in the new national security strategy – exactly this logic was also clearly visible in Davos and around the conflict over Greenland.
taz: Is the USA now more of a competitor than a partner when it comes to securing raw materials?
Mitigate: The past few weeks have made it clear how prone to conflict the transatlantic relationship has become. At the same time, it would be strategically short-sighted if states were to act in isolation and compete against each other for scarce raw materials. It is therefore also crucial that the EU as a whole sits at the table – not just individual member states. If countries like Germany, Poland or France act primarily as independent actors, this weakens the European negotiating position and makes Europe as a whole smaller than it needs to be.
taz: So the EU can only sit at the table in Washington?
Mitigate: It is crucial not to undermine existing multilateral approaches, but rather to strengthen them in a targeted manner. This includes in particular the G7 Global Critical Minerals Action Plan initiated by Canada. Even if this is still being fleshed out, this is the right step. Whether it will be possible to permanently integrate the USA into such a multilateral framework remains an open question. What is strategically crucial, however, is that these formats exist as a counterweight to national solo efforts and as a basis for a coordinated, resilient raw materials policy.
taz: The US government wants to invest billions in secure supplies of raw materials. Does Europe have the right answer to this?
Mitigate: The EU and Germany are under considerable time pressure to better position and secure their industries. The supply of critical raw materials is an important component. It is striking that the USA and Europe have redesigned their current raw materials policy based on the same historical impulse: the Chinese export restrictions for rare earths towards Japan in 2010/2011. But today we are again faced with the same structural problems and are discussing largely the same instruments as fifteen years ago.
taz: Which one?
Mitigate: The toolbox includes, among other things: the bundling of industrial demand at the European level, the targeted securing of investments through guarantees and purchase agreements, and the accelerated development of our own processing and recycling capacities. Faster approvals for strategic projects are also urgently needed. At the same time, the debate about strategic reserves is still open. Which raw materials are really critical, how large do such warehouses have to be and who assumes responsibility and costs?
taz: What role do existing raw material partnerships between Germany and the EU play in this? The EU Court of Auditors only certified on Monday that they have had little effect so far…
Mitigate: Raw materials agreements are an important instrument for the EU: They set the framework for cooperation, create trust, provide support in governance issues and in the preparation of concrete projects. These are key requirements, especially in partner countries rich in raw materials. At the same time, the criticism is justified in that many of these partnerships have so far remained primarily at the level of government agreements and declarations of intent. Ultimately, they need to be filled with more life – and this requires stronger economic incentives, for example through purchase guarantees, risk sharing or clearer European demand bundling.
taz: Companies have to take action. What are you waiting for?
Mitigate: The economy looks at risks. Many of these partnerships concern high-risk countries, politically and economically. Companies are afraid of that. In addition, many of them stopped mining and processing raw materials decades ago. So far there has been little interest in getting back into raw material projects. There is a lack of expertise, it is risky and requires huge investments. It will take some time before new supply chains emerge in the raw materials sector.