Bakhtawar Iftikhar-Lithium-MDS

As the world struggles to decouple from fossil fuels under the umbrella of a green future, the demand for critical minerals is increasing. The clean technology industry, like many others, relies upon critical minerals or ‘Rare Earth Elements’ extracted from the ground. Lithium is one such metal critical for electric rechargeable batteries heavily used in Electric Vehicles (EVs) and electrical grid storage. It is also perceived as ‘a strategic commodity that could contribute to energy independence.’ This discussion narrows in on one of the most critical aspects of this issue: the challenges faced by the United States and China’s emerging dominance in the lithium battery sector, and the broader implications of this dynamic for the green transition; and how developments in these states are shaping the landscape of global renewable energy and environmental policy.

Market dynamics vary from mineral to mineral, but in the case of lithium, the US has had a few domestic shortcomings. Despite its significant lithium reserves of  9.1 million tonnes, the US only has one operational lithium mine at Silver Peak, Nevada. Moreover, domestic refining and processing activities have been stagnant. A ‘lack of industrial policy and national strategy’ is cited as one of the weaknesses in an analysis of the US position in global battery manufacturing. Meanwhile, Beijing dominates the lithium-ion battery supply chain. China is the only state with the capacity to ‘process lithium from raw material to finished batteries without having to rely on imported chemicals or components and six out of the biggest EV-battery producers are based in China.’ Hence, in the last decade, the burgeoning EV market has inevitably led the US to rely heavily on imports, particularly from China. This dependence is especially evident in the market for lithium-ion (li-ion) batteries. In the first quarter of 2023, a staggering 87.9% of US li-ion battery imports originated from China. This trend is not new, though as in 2022, the US spent USD 9.3 billion on li-ion battery imports, predominantly from China. While other sources like South Korea and Japan do contribute to the US import market, their shares are relatively minor when compared to China’s dominant role.

With anti-China sentiment growing in Washington, China’s dominance in the lithium-ion battery market is seen as a threat to the United States’ quest for technological supremacy. Beyond geopolitical rivalry, there’s a palpable concern about serious supply risks, should this dominance be leveraged strategically. A historical precedent heightens these fears: in 2010, during a dispute over the Senkaku Islands, China reportedly ceased rare-earth exports to Japan. Consequently, the US is wary of potential scenarios of China ‘throttling supply or dramatically raising prices.’ Such actions would have profound repercussions on the American transportation and logistics sectors, disrupting critical supply chains.

Given these challenges, the Biden Administration has recognised the need to secure supply. US Senators have called for developing a strategic rare-earth reserve by 2025 via stockpiling critical minerals, including lithium, but doing so in an ‘environmentally-sustainable’ manner since the common mining processes pose significant environmental risks. In addition, the Pentagon also recognises the need for stockpiles under the pretext of its apparent aim of zero-emissions and the need for lithium-ion batteries in weaponry such as Raytheon Technologies Corp’s precision-guided munitions.

Re-invoking Cold War-era’s Defence Production Act in 2022, Biden planned to take a mineral-by-mineral approach to ramp up domestic production. The American Battery Material Initiative intends to produce enough ‘battery-grade lithium to supply around 2 million EVs’. This would be supplemented by offering tax credits and incentives to companies using ‘minerals and battery components from US and its allies.’

At the same time, the US is attempting to exclude China from its supply-security initiatives. For example, a draft document by the US Department of Energy establishes an eligibility criteria for the subsidies being offered and excludes Foreign Entities of Concerns, i.e. ‘any company more than 25 per cent owned by Chinese, shareholders’. Externally, the US will diversify supply by rallying support from states other than China through the Mineral Security Partnership. Thus, these measures collectively demonstrate the Biden Administration’s ambition to catch up with China in the rare-earths domain.

However, the current US approach may create a detrimental impact on the global community at large. It could further fuel  US-China tensions and impede collaboration between these two nations at a time when unified action is crucial, particularly in addressing the imminent threat of climate change. China’s advancement in battery technology not only underscores its role as a key player in the climate change battle but also highlights its potential to facilitate a worldwide transition to EVs. Leveraging China’s comparative advantage in battery production could be instrumental in this global shift, underscoring the need for cooperative rather than confrontational international relations. Therefore, the world would benefit from the two superpowers engaging responsibly with one another and cultivating a coordinated response.

To conclude, an imperial competition for resources should not overshadow a collective commitment to the green agenda. Power play between geopolitical rivals must not come at the cost of the intricate ecological balance that has been established over millennia.

Bakhtawar Iftikhar is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. She can be reached at [email protected].

Design Credit:  Mysha Dua Salman


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The West: The History of an Idea

The world is witnessing the collapse of the Western order, if not the emergence of an alternative one. The idea of ‘West’ as against the rest is still at the root of contemporary understanding of world politics. Georgios Varouxakis, a remarkable voice on Modernity and Nationalism, has provided the historical origins and modern connotations attached with the idea of ‘West’. In his book ‘The West: The History of an Idea’, Varouxakis has argued that the West is not an eternal entity, rather it is a modern socio-political construct that emerged in the political philosophy of the early 19th century and evolved with the passage of time. The book provides an in-depth historical analysis of the idea to determine the roots of its modern interpretation.

Read More »

Space-Enabled Warfare in the 21st Century: Pathways for Developing States

Space has emerged as a distinct domain of warfare alongside land, sea, air, and cyber. Developed countries like the United States, Russia, and China possess offensive and support capabilities in space. In the shadowed expanse of Low Earth Orbit (LEO), where satellites operate like silent custodians, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine transformed the nature of modern conflict. As Russian troops marched forward, the commercial satellites like Maxar and Planet, which are operated by Western firms, captured high-resolution imagery of Russian troops, providing real-time intelligence to Ukrainian commanders, unlike ever before.

Read More »

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »