In a sharp escalation of trade tensions, the United States has publicly warned that China’s proposed export controls on critical minerals and rare earths may trigger a global economic “decoupling” from China. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer described Beijing’s moves as coercive and a threat to international supply chains. (Financial Times)
If implemented broadly, China’s export licensing requirements could force countries and companies to shift away from Chinese supplier networks in sensitive sectors like semiconductors, electronics, defense, and clean energy. (Reuters)
This article examines what “decoupling” could mean in practice, the risks and responses from global players, and how U.S.–China trade relations may shift in coming months.
What China’s New Export Controls Propose
China has rolled out stricter controls on rare earths and critical minerals, especially where those materials are used in defense, semiconductors, or advanced electronics. (Reuters)
Some key features:
-
Foreign firms that export goods containing certain Chinese-sourced materials may need Chinese government licenses. (Financial Times)
-
Components used in semiconductors or defense applications could undergo case-by-case review, or licensing may be denied. (Reuters)
-
China aims to restrict collaboration with foreign entities in rare earth sectors without prior approval. (Reuters)
China argues these controls are a response to U.S. export restrictions and sanctions. But U.S. officials interpret them as a strategic maneuver to exert control over global supply chains. (Reuters)
Why the U.S. Is Raising the Alarm
Threat to Global Supply Chains
Rare earths and critical minerals are essential to modern electronics, EVs, batteries, computing hardware, magnets, and defense systems. Many industries already rely heavily on Chinese processing and refining. (Financial Times)
By making export licensing mandatory, China could disrupt or delay shipments of components needed for chips, circuit boards, and electronic assemblies worldwide. (Financial Times)
Economic Coercion and Strategic Leverage
U.S. officials describe the move as “economic coercion” — using China’s dominance in mineral supply to exert leverage over nations and companies. (Financial Times)
It could also force firms and countries to pick sides or shift away from dependence on Chinese inputs. Such a forced realignment is precisely what U.S. officials warn could amount to decoupling. (Financial Times)
Retaliation Threats from the U.S.
In response, the U.S. has threatened to impose 100% tariffs on Chinese goods if the export controls proceed. (AP News)
Trade Representative Greer and Secretary Bessent warned that the U.S. is prepared to retaliate if needed, and is working with allies to coordinate responses. (Reuters)
Officials also emphasize that the U.S. aims not to fully decouple, but to de-risk by diversifying supply chains and reducing overreliance on China. (Financial Times)
What “Decoupling” Could Look Like
“Decoupling” refers to a deliberate separation of economic, technological, and supply chain links between countries. In this context, it means reducing dependence on China, especially in strategic sectors.
Some possible outcomes:
-
Countries may shift sourcing of minerals or components from China to alternative suppliers (e.g. Australia, rare earth projects in U.S./Canada/Africa).
-
Nations may encourage domestic mining, refining, and processing to reduce strategic vulnerabilities.
-
Firms may redesign products to avoid Chinese-sourced components or use “trusted” supply chains.
-
Bilateral or multilateral alliances (e.g. U.S., Japan, EU, Australia) could coordinate action to build alternative ecosystems.
-
China might retaliate by strengthening its own export controls or curbing cooperation with nations perceived as decoupling.
However, full decoupling is risky, costly, and time-consuming. Many industries are deeply integrated across global chains.
Challenges and Risks of Decoupling
High Costs and Disruption
Shifting supply chains isn’t cheap. It requires investment in new mines, processing plants, logistics, and regulatory frameworks. Delays, cost overruns, and resource constraints are possible.
Technical and Material Hurdles
Some rare earth elements and critical minerals are geologically scarce in many regions, or China currently holds significant refining capacity and technological advantage. (Reuters)
China’s dominance in refining and downstream processing gives it leverage even if raw mineral sources are elsewhere.
Retaliation Risk
China could counter with its own restrictions, trade barriers, or punitive measures against countries or firms reducing dependence.
Fragmentation of Standards and Markets
Decoupling could lead to fragmentation: different geographies adopting incompatible technologies, standards, or restricted trade blocs, which hampers interoperability and scale.
How Global Players May Respond
U.S. and Allies
-
Increase investment in mining, refining, and processing domestically or in allied countries (e.g. Australia, Canada, Africa)
-
Create strategic stockpiles of essential minerals
-
Offer subsidies, tax incentives, or grants to build supply chain resilience
-
Coordinate diplomacy to pressure China or propose new trade frameworks
China’s Likely Moves
-
Push back diplomatically and rhetorically, accusing the U.S. of economic aggression
-
Selectively exempt certain exporters while enforcing control elsewhere
-
Seek deeper trade ties with non-aligned nations
-
Accelerate efforts to vertically integrate rare earth mining, refining, manufacturing
Private Sector and Corporations
-
Reevaluate supply chain dependencies
-
Explore alternative materials, design changes, or recycling of rare earths to reduce import reliance
-
Diversify suppliers and back-up channels
-
Monitor policy changes and respond with proactive compliance
What This Means for Tech & Industries
-
Semiconductors & computing could face shortages or cost hikes if critical materials are delayed or blocked
-
Consumer electronics, EVs, batteries may see production disruptions or redesign pressure
-
Defense & aerospace industries are particularly vulnerable, as they rely on high purity rare earths and critical minerals
-
Green energy & renewables (wind turbines, solar inverters) may need alternative supply chains
-
Tech R&D could shift toward materials science, recycling, substitution, and supply chain innovation
Near-term Outlook & Diplomatic Tensions
A pivotal moment lies ahead: whether the Trump–Xi meeting at the upcoming APEC summit yields any de-escalation or compromise. (Financial Times)
U.S. officials have expressed cautious optimism about diplomacy but warned that they are prepared for retaliation if China enacts sweeping controls. (Financial Times)
Markets have already reacted: uncertainty over supply chains and tariff escalation is affecting investor sentiment in tech and industrial sectors. (AP News)
Conclusion
China’s proposed export controls on rare earths and critical materials are not just trade moves — they carry strategic weight in global technology and supply chain domains. The U.S. warning of potential decoupling signals the high stakes involved.
Whether the world truly drifts into two separate technological spheres or finds a compromise or middle path depends on decisions in boardrooms and diplomacy. But one thing is clear: the rules of global trade, technology, and supply chains are being rewritten.