Highlights

• China controls 70% of U.S. rare earth supply and 99% of heavy rare earths, creating strategic dependency in defense systems, EVs, and semiconductors.
• SCMP's narrative portrays China's export control suspension as de-escalation, but omits that Beijing retains leverage to toggle supply at will while U.S. cannot.
• The article underplays emerging non-Chinese supply chains in Australia, U.S., Canada, and Brazil, plus the Pentagon's role as market-maker through Defense Production Act funding.

---

A recent South China Morning Post (SCMP) “Spark Deep Dive” piece (opens in a new tab) frames rare earths as the beating heart of the U.S.–China trade war—an accurate, if incomplete, portrayal. Rare earth elements (REEs) are embedded in smartphones, EV drivetrains, wind turbines, radar systems, missile actuators, and submarine propulsion. The article correctly notes China’s overwhelming dominance: 44 million tonnes of reserves, magnet manufacturing supremacy, and near-total control of heavy rare earth separation. The Council on Foreign Relations’ estimate—that the U.S. relies on China for ~70% of REEs and ~99% of heavies—is credible and widely cited.

However, the SCMP narrative subtly implies a binary dependency: China as the indispensable supplier, the U.S. as a helpless buyer. The piece underplays emerging non-Chinese supply chains in Australia, the U.S., Canada, Brazil, and the EU—all in active development since 2020. It also omits the Pentagon’s direct role as a market-maker through Defense Production Act funding and price-floor agreements. The result: a story that is factually grounded but not fully contextualized.

When Minerals Become Leverage: Parsing the Claims

SCMP asserts that China tightened export controls “in response” to Trump’s April tariffs. That framing is plausible, yet speculative without acknowledging China’s longer-term strategy: to weaponize chokepoints in gallium, germanium, rare earth magnets, and separation technologies. The article correctly notes China’s control of refined gallium (98.8%), a material essential for semiconductors and radar. It also rightly identifies U.S. defense systems’ heavy dependence on antimony, gallium, and germanium.

What’s missing is nuance: China’s export controls did not meaningfully reduce production—only licensing requirements tightened. Nor does SCMP explore whether China’s October agreement to “suspend controls” constitutes a genuine concession or simply a tactical pause ahead of global price resets.

Negotiation Theater: Agreement or Illusion?

The article depicts the late-October Xi–Trump meeting in South Korea as a breakthrough, portraying a “one-year suspension” of controls as stabilizing. Yet SCMP does not interrogate the underlying power dynamics: China can turn the valve at will. The U.S. cannot. The very ability to toggle export functions as leverage, regardless of whether shipments pause.

This omission reflects a bias toward describing the agreement as de-escalation rather than a strategic timeout. The bias is subtle but present: a softened portrayal of Chinese state power, typical of outlets operating under Beijing’s media environment.

Speculation Watch: Where the Story Gets Thin

“China tightened controls to fight off U.S. supply-chain ambitions.”
Plausible, but speculative. Beijing’s goals are layered—price control, environmental enforcement claims, mercantilist strategy—not just retaliation.

“Agreement by Thanksgiving.”
Pure political theater; the article treats it as a credible endpoint.

Source: South China Morning Post (SCMP), November 23, 2025.

© 2025 Rare Earth Exchanges™ – Accelerating Transparency, Accuracy, and Insight Across the Rare Earth & Critical Minerals Supply Chain.