Highlights
- The 2019 federal strategy outlined six strategic Calls to Action to reduce dependence on foreign mineral sources and rebuild domestic capabilities.
- Key focus areas included:
- Advancing R&D
- International cooperation
- Permitting reform
- Developing a skilled workforce in critical minerals production
- Despite strategic efforts, the U.S. remains significantly behind China in rare earth and critical mineral supply chain dominance.
In response to growing dependence on foreign sources for critical minerals essential to national security and economic prosperity, the Trump administration issued Executive Order 13817 in 2017. (opens in a new tab) This directive launched a sweeping federal strategy finalized in 2019, (opens in a new tab) outlining six major Calls to Action supported by 24 goals and 61 recommendations. The plan’s core objectives were to secure domestic supplies of critical minerals, stimulate private sector investment, advance scientific R&D, streamline permitting and access to federal lands, improve trade relationships with allies, and grow the U.S. workforce needed to sustain a domestic supply chain.
The first Call to Action emphasized advancing transformational research and development across the entire critical minerals supply chain. Federal agencies were tasked with funding research on novel extraction, separation, and recycling technologies while promoting alternatives to rare minerals. A key focus was also placed on sourcing minerals from unconventional sources like coal byproducts, mine tailings, and even seawater. In parallel, the second Call to Action aimed to rebuild domestic processing and manufacturing capabilities, including incentives for rare earth magnet production and the use of the Defense Production Act to stabilize strategic industries.
International cooperation played a central role, particularly under the third Call to Action, which encouraged trade and security agreements with allied nations such as Canada, Australia, Japan, and the EU. These measures sought to counter market manipulation by foreign actors—especially China—through robust enforcement of trade laws and investment in alternative global supply chains. Domestically, the fourth Call to Action called for improved geological mapping and data access, enabling better private-sector exploration. Simultaneously, the fifth focused on reforming burdensome permitting processes, updating NEPA procedures, and expanding access to federal lands—highlighting programs like FAST-41 to accelerate project approvals.
Finally, the sixth Call to Action addressed the shrinking pipeline of skilled labor. It recommended bolstering mining-related STEM education, expanding community college programs, and increasing staffing at key agencies like the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service. Taken together, the 2019 strategy presented a detailed blueprint for reestablishing U.S. dominance in critical mineral supply chains through innovation, infrastructure reform, strategic alliances, and workforce renewal.
Comparative Analysis: 2019 Strategy vs. 2025 Executive Order
| Category | 2019 Strategy (Trump) | 2025 EO (Trump II) |
|---|---|---|
| Core Focus | Comprehensive supply chain resilience, from raw material to finished goods. | Narrowed focus on Federal land access, permitting reform, and speeding project approvals |
| Permitting Reform | Advocated NEPA reform, land-use planning overhauls, interagency coordination, and online tracking of permitting milestones. | Escalates permitting streamlining via expanded FAST-41 eligibility, One Federal Decision, and greater state/tribal authority under Clean Water Act. |
| International Cooperation | Trade alliances, reciprocal procurement, and joint R&D with allies like Canada, Japan, EU. | Continued but less emphasized; focus has shifted inward toward domestic acceleration. |
| R&D Investment | Heavily emphasized: CMI, DOE labs, new tech for extraction, recycling, substitution. | Less central in 2025 EO (pending full details), but assumed to continue under broader industrial strategy. |
| Federal Land Access | Major effort to catalog and reverse unnecessary land withdrawals; call for BLM/USFS reform. | Central thrust of 2025 EO: Executive action to remove permitting bottlenecks and open federal lands for mining. |
| Workforce Development | Targeted investments in mining engineering programs, STEM outreach, and agency staffing. | Not yet specified in the 2025 EO, but likely to emerge in implementation plans. |
| Defense Industrial Base | REEs and magnet manufacturing flagged as national security priorities; calls to leverage Defense Production Act and stockpiles. | Echoed in 2025 EO, but with emphasis on accelerating production over upstream research or ecosystem development. |
| Mapping and Data Access | Expansive call for open, digitized geospatial data for exploration; interoperability across agencies. | Unclear in 2025 EO; if omitted, may be a strategic oversight. |
Final Assessment
The 2019 Strategy was broad, foundational, and comprehensive—focusing on systemic issues across the entire value chain of critical minerals, with strong emphasis on R&D, international partnerships, and data transparency. Note little happened as Trump lost the 2020 election largely due to COVID-19 pandemic-related issues.
The 2025 Executive Order (as summarized so far) appears more surgical and action-driven: it seeks to immediately unlock federal lands and reduce permitting timeframes, building upon the groundwork laid in 2019 but with more urgency, fewer guardrails, and a domestic production focus over global collaboration or foundational R&D.
Despite the ambitious scope of Trump’s 2017 executive order and the detailed 2019 federal strategy, the U.S. remains unlikely to catch up to China in the rare earth and critical mineral space any time soon. China has spent decades building near-total dominance not only in rare earth mining but, more crucially, in midstream processing and downstream manufacturing—including permanent magnet production and key components for clean energy and defense systems. Its centralized “Two Rare Earth Bases” and tight control over refining capacity give it unmatched leverage.
While the U.S. strategy rightly emphasized alliances, a second Trump administration appears to be veering toward a more economic nationalist and unilateral posture, undermining the trust and coordination needed to build resilient allied supply chains. This represents a problem although some Rare Earth Exchanges community members suggest the pieces are being put in place for American rare earth resilience within five years.
Rare Earth Exchanges suggests that without deep, sustained collaboration with partners like Australia, Canada, Japan, and the EU, a willingness to invest heavily in domestic industrial (midstream and downstream) infrastructure, the urgently needed workforce, and federal financial support, the U.S. risks falling further behind in this strategic race.
Leave a Reply