Connect with us

Economics

Trump’s rare earth deals target China’s dominance — here’s why change won’t come soon

Published

on

TOKYO, JAPAN – OCTOBER 28: U.S. President Donald Trump (L) and Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi (R) hold up signed documents for a critical minerals/rare earth deal with Japan during a meeting at Akasaka Palace on October 28, 2025 in Tokyo, Japan.

Andrew Harnik | Getty Images News

U.S. President Donald Trump’s push to secure rare earth supply deals across Asia will ultimately weaken China’s dominance in the global supply chain for critical minerals — but analysts said the buildup will take years.

Over 10 days, Trump cemented deals with Australia, Malaysia, Cambodia and most recently, Japan, to bolster the supply of rare earths and other critical minerals that are crucial for the making of batteries, automobiles, defense systems and computing chips.

The flurry of deals — part of Washington’s bid to counter Beijing’s chokehold on the sector — comes ahead of his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Busan on Thursday.

The deals may “benefit immensely from being linked together in a plurilateral agreement with strong commitments, financing and pooling of resources,” said Wendy Cutler, senior vice president at Asia Society Policy Institute. She expects more of such deals to follow under the Trump administration.

Trump and Xi are expected to address several contentious issues that have stalled the long-running trade talks, including Beijing’s rare earth export controls and Washington’s tariff threats and technology restrictions.

In the medium term, we will get off the Chinese supply chain, but in the short term, there’s still a great deal of dependency on China.

Dennis Wilder

Senior fellow at Georgetown University

The most recent win for Trump was an agreement with Japan aimed at securing the supply of raw and processed critical minerals while also pledging funding for selected projects within the next six months. Earlier pacts with Australia, Malaysia and Thailand also outlined multibillion-dollar plans, commitments to fair trade practices and to avoid export bans or quotas.

While Trump’s deals will bring much-needed financial support to the industry and may eventually challenge Beijing’s stranglehold over rare earths, experts said the efforts will be costly and take years to bear fruit.

“What we are trying to do now is to get off the Chinese as the primary supply chain, but that will take time,” said Dennis Wilder, a former senior U.S. intelligence official and now a senior fellow at Georgetown University.

“In the medium term, we will get off the Chinese supply chain, but in the short term, there’s still a great deal of dependency on China,” Wilder stressed.

Goldman Sachs estimates new rare earth mines tend to take up to a decade to develop, with known reserves for certain elements “very scarce” outside of Myanmar and China, while building refineries would take about 5 years.

China dominates 69% of the market share for rare earth mining, 92% of refining and 98% of magnet manufacturing, the bank estimates.

Level playing field

These deals are a “game-changer” that could reduce the U.S. vulnerabilities to Beijing’s export controls, stabilize rare earth prices and accelerate domestic innovative refining and recycling, said Brodie Sutherland, CEO of Patriot Critical Minerals Corp, a U.S.-based critical minerals developer.

With assured access to raw materials from friendly nations, American firms can focus on efficient extraction, ethical mining and value-added processing, said Sutherland.

He also cited longer-term benefits such as lower risk premiums on financing, faster permitting for new sites and a “level playing field against subsidized foreign competitors.”

China has allowed rare earth prices to swing in very “strategic” ways to make projects in other countries unprofitable, said Mike Rosenberg, a professor of strategic management at IESE Business School.

By using public funds to back these projects, global miners and refiners ought to be able to make investments that guarantee a reasonable return, Rosenberg added.

Efforts to diversify and reshore production, however, will inevitably mean accepting some environmental tradeoffs, experts said.

Mining and refining rare earth materials in an ecologically friendly way is “very, very expensive,” Rosenberg noted, while China kept costs low by limiting environmental controls.

“Consumers may need to accept higher prices for electronics and green technologies that reflect their true material and environmental cost,” said Patrick Schröder, a senior research fellow at the Environment and Society Center at Chatham House.

The policy push has also fueled a rally in several U.S.-listed rare earth miners this year. New York-listed shares of MP Materials and Trilogy Metals have each more than quadrupled, Energy Fuels has tripled, while Critical Metals is up nearly 90% and USA Rare Earth about 75%, according to LSEG data.

Wake-up call

Rare Earths Diplomacy: US plays a long game in deal with Malaysia, says former envoy

“Beijing’s latest threat on sweeping extraterritorial export restrictions in this sector has served as a needed wake-up call to partners around the world,” said Asia Society Policy Institute’s Cutler.

China may have miscalculated with the export controls that rattled the global economy and widened the trade war to include other nations, said Wilder of Georgetown University, noting that “it wasn’t in China’s interest.”

“It was a useful weapon when it was targeted at the U.S., but it becomes less useful when you try and expand that to the rest of the world,” Wilder said. “Because then you bring the rest of the world over to the U.S. in many ways.”

Economics

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

Published

on

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

On July 20, Andy Burnham has been chosen to be the next Prime Minister in UK. The appointment of a new Prime Minister in the United Kingdom often raises questions from people outside the country, especially when no nationwide election has taken place. Many wonder how a new national leader can assume office without voters casting ballots. The answer lies in the UK’s parliamentary system, where the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the public but is instead chosen based on who commands the confidence of the House of Commons.

How the UK Selects Its Prime Minister

Unlike presidential systems where citizens vote directly for the head of government, the United Kingdom elects Members of Parliament (MPs) during a general election. The political party that secures a majority of seats in the House of Commons usually forms the government, and that party selects its own leader to serve as Prime Minister.

If the leader resigns, becomes unable to continue, or is replaced by their party, the governing party can choose a new leader without triggering a general election. As long as the new leader is able to maintain the confidence of Parliament, they can immediately become Prime Minister after being formally appointed by the monarch.

Why No Election Was Required

A general election is not automatically required every time the office of Prime Minister changes hands. The governing party retains its parliamentary majority because voters elected MPs rather than an individual Prime Minister. If the ruling party chooses a new leader through its internal leadership process, the government continues to operate without interruption.

This constitutional arrangement provides stability and allows the government to continue functioning during periods of political transition. It also avoids the expense and disruption of holding a nationwide election every time party leadership changes.

The King’s Constitutional Role

After a governing party elects a new leader, the monarch invites that individual to form a government. This constitutional step is largely ceremonial and follows long-established conventions. The King appoints the person most likely to command a majority in the House of Commons, ensuring continuity of government.

Although the monarch formally appoints the Prime Minister, political power rests with Parliament and the elected representatives of the British people.

Could an Election Still Happen?

Yes. A newly appointed Prime Minister has the authority to request a general election if they believe it is politically advantageous or if they seek a stronger public mandate. Parliament can also reach a point where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, potentially leading to an election or the formation of a new government.

In many cases, however, a new Prime Minister continues governing until the next scheduled general election.

What This Means for the UK

The UK’s parliamentary democracy is designed to ensure government continuity while respecting the results of the most recent general election. Leadership changes within the governing party do not automatically alter the composition of Parliament, which is why a new Prime Minister can take office without another nationwide vote.

Understanding this process helps explain why political transitions in the United Kingdom can appear different from those in countries with presidential systems. While the Prime Minister may change, the democratic mandate of Parliament remains in place until voters elect a new House of Commons at the next general election.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Grid Upgrades Reshape Macro Economics

Published

on

Global grid upgrades reshape macro economics

On July 21, 2026, global economic analysis shifts focus toward a defining structural macroeconomic trend: the massive expansion of public and private capital deployment into high-capacity electrical grid infrastructure. As industrial electrification, automated data center hubs, and renewable energy integration accelerate worldwide, sovereign governments and institutional investors are facing a monumental economic challenge. Updating legacy power grids to meet skyrocketing demand has emerged as a primary driver of long-term capital expenditures and industrial productivity across both developed and emerging market economies.

According to international economic policy updates released this week, grid infrastructure investments are projected to exceed multi-trillion-dollar thresholds over the coming decade. Economic planners caution that without modernized, high-voltage transmission networks, regional manufacturing sectors face severe energy bottlenecks, localized power price volatility, and operational constraints. Consequently, infrastructure spending is rapidly transitioning from passive utility maintenance into a vital component of national economic competitiveness and industrial policy.

The macroeconomic ripple effects of this capital deployment are being felt across global commodity markets and labor networks. High demand for structural industrial inputs—such as copper, aluminum, specialized electrical steel, and high-capacity transformers—has created sustained pricing support for critical material producers. Simultaneously, the specialized technical labor required to manufacture and deploy modern grid hardware is driving wage growth in industrial sectors, adding a complex new layer to central bank disinflation trajectories.

For global policymakers and strategic investors, the economics of energy grid modernization represent a double-edged sword. While massive infrastructure investment boosts short-term gross domestic product (GDP) and strengthens domestic industrial foundations, it requires disciplined fiscal allocation to prevent inflationary crowding-out of private capital. Countries that efficiently streamline grid infrastructure permitting and mobilize private investment will secure lower long-term energy costs, attracting high-tech manufacturing and reinforcing sustainable economic growth.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

Published

on

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

The international trade architecture entering the second half of 2026 is undergoing a profound structural pivot. As major sovereign economic blocs adjust to the long-term impact of unilateral tariffs and escalating regional subsidies, traditional globalized supply chains are being rapidly replaced by bilateral trade corridors and regional alliance networks. Data released in late July 2026 highlights a significant divergence: while cross-continental freight volumes between non-aligned partners have cooled, intra-regional trade throughout North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe has surged to record levels. This shift reflects a broader macroeconomic strategy wherein multinational corporations prioritize geopolitical resilience over pure cost minimization.

The primary economic catalyst behind this regionalization is the proliferation of sector-specific tariffs targeting critical industries, notably battery components, clean energy technology, and advanced semiconductor hardware. In response, global manufacturers have adopted multi-tier sourcing models that distribute production across intermediate partner nations before final assembly. While this strategy successfully bypasses primary import duties, it adds structural layers of logistical complexity and administrative oversight. Economists note that while total output remains robust, aggregate production costs have drifted upward, contributing to persistent baseline inflation across major consumer markets.

Simultaneously, currency settlement patterns within these regional blocs are experiencing a notable transformation. Sovereign central banks and commercial institutions are increasingly utilizing localized currency swap lines and digital clearing mechanisms to settle cross-border trade transactions. This transition reduces direct exposure to foreign exchange volatility and mitigates third-party liquidity constraints, further solidifying regional economic cohesion. However, for developing economies situated outside these primary trading alliances, the tightening of international trade networks presents severe challenges, restricting access to key export markets and foreign direct investment.

For corporate strategists and policy analysts navigating late 2026, success requires a thorough understanding of these emerging trade corridors. Organizations must conduct regular risk assessments of their multi-tier supplier networks, model tariff sensitivities under shifting geopolitical scenarios, and invest in real-time supply chain telemetry. As regional economic blocs strengthen their regulatory borders, supply chain agility and compliance fortitude will distinguish market leaders from vulnerable enterprises in the evolving global economy.

Continue Reading

Trending