Highlights

• Study shows political proximity significantly influences critical minerals trade, especially after 2016.
• Minerals like nickel, cobalt, and vanadium are most vulnerable to geopolitical shifts in trade patterns.
• Political alignment now plays a crucial role in determining access to strategic minerals for energy and digital transitions.

---

Markos Farag of the University of Cologne, working with Chahir Zaki of the University of Orléans (LEO) and Cairo University, leads a timely investigation into one of today’s most pressing questions: Do politics determine who trades critical minerals with whom? Their study, published in Resources Policy (Volume 109, October 2025), tests the hypothesis that political alignment—measured through United Nations voting patterns—directly influences trade flows in minerals essential to clean energy, digital technologies, and national security.

Study Design and Methods

The researchers applied a gravity model of international trade, covering 1995 to 2022, to capture how bilateral flows in critical minerals respond to political distance from either China or the United States. They used the Poisson Pseudo Maximum Likelihood estimator to account for zero trade flows and heteroskedasticity, improving accuracy. To sharpen the lens, the team examined not just overall trade but also differences by processing stage (processed vs. semi-processed), market concentration, and sectoral use (energy, digital, or both).

Findings

The results reveal a striking shift after 2016, coinciding with the U.S.–China trade war. Before 2016, political distance often increased trade with China. After 2016, the pattern flipped: countries politically dissimilar to China traded less. With the United States, results were more mixed but showed a similar tightening—political proximity mattered more after 2016.

Particularly sensitive were semi-processed minerals, those with highly concentrated supply (like cobalt, vanadium, and rare earths), and minerals critical to both the energy and digital transitions. At a product level, nickel, cobalt, molybdenum, vanadium, copper, and aluminum were among the most geopolitically exposed. Troubling signals include the clear vulnerability of supply chains where concentration and politics intersect—raising the risk that “friendshoring” could fracture markets further.

Limitations

The study relies on UN voting similarity as a proxy for political alignment, which may miss subtler dynamics such as defense pacts or informal alliances. While the model captures large patterns, it cannot explain causation at the level of individual trade decisions. The data also ends in 2022, just as U.S. tariffs and China’s export restrictions accelerated in 2024–25.

Conclusion and Implications

Farag and Zaki’s work highlights a new reality: trade in critical minerals is no longer just about economics. Political alliances increasingly dictate who secures access to the building blocks of the energy and digital future. For policymakers, the warning is clear: supply diversification, recycling, and alliance-building are not optional—they are strategic imperatives.

Citation:

Farag, M., & Zaki, C. (2025). Allies and enemies: On the political determinants of trade in critical minerals. Resources Policy, 109, 105701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2025.105701 (opens in a new tab)

©!-- /wp:paragraph -->