The Geopolitical Race for Critical Minerals in Africa: Strategic Opportunity or Curse?
- Ane Burke
- Mar 6
- 7 min read
Written by Ane Burke Saez de Heredua (BSc International Relations)
Africa is at the center of a global ‘race’ for critical minerals. The continent is rich in cobalt, graphite and lithium, and is home to some of the world’s largest mining reserves. Critical minerals are ‘critical’ because of their essential role in modern technologies: metals like copper are used in semiconductors, electric vehicles, solar panels and even in the defense industry. In fact, their wide-ranging utility has attracted significant engagement from major powers like the United States, China and the European union. As these foreign countries compete over Africa’s mineral wealth, the continent finds itself at the heart of a complex geopolitical and economic rivalry. This article emphasizes that the demand for African critical minerals is rising and describes why major powers have become increasingly interested in the region. It warns against critical mineral supply chains becoming extractive and suggests that African governments should prioritize their agency by positioning themselves as central actors in the industry.
AFRICAN MINERALS
Africa is home to an estimated 30% of all critical mineral reserves, and the current demand for the continent’s resources is unprecedented: according to the IAEA, demand is expected to double by 2030, and quadruple by 2040. Climate change is a leading driver of this because many renewable technologies like wind turbines and electric vehicle batteries depend on materials like cobalt. Currently, the world’s largest reserve of cobalt is in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Therefore, as more countries transition towards cleaner energy, it is clear that African critical minerals are going to become more central to the global economy.
Another reason why the demand for African critical minerals has skyrocketed is because of supply chain diversification. Both the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine exposed the risks of economic dependency in a globalized world, and more states have shifted their focus on where to secure raw materials. With the USA and the EU specifically, African minerals have become strategically important because they provide an alternative to Chinese ones. Both Washington and Brussels are virtually 100% dependent on Beijing for certain mineral imports, and as geopolitical tensions rise, these Western states seek diversification.
THE KEY PLAYERS
China
China is the leading player in the race for Africa’s mineral wealth and currently refines an estimated 60-90% of most critical minerals. Besides being the continent’s largest trading partner, Beijing is also Africa’s greatest foreign direct investor. In fact, investment projects like the Belt and Road initiative have allowed China to gain such an advantage in the industry. Chinese mining and battery companies have invested as much as 4.5 billion in African lithium mines alone, and doing so has given them favorable access to supply chains across countries like Namibia, Zimbabwe and Mali. There is no doubt that Beijing’s influence over African minerals is widespread, and as the race for green technology continues, we should expect to see even more Chinese-funded developments.
China’s interest in African minerals is both economic and geopolitical. China was one of the first to recognize the potential of green technology manufacturing, and in 2023, clean energy investment became its main growth driver. Politically, Beijing has also benefitted from its monopoly over mineral refinement: 2 years ago, it placed export restrictions on gallium and germanium, and in late 2024, it banned them entirely to the USA. Both gallium and germanium are vital inputs for American defense technologies, which illustrates how China can leverage its control over critical minerals in the name of its “national security”.
USA
The USA lags behind China in the race for African critical minerals. Thus far, the flagship American effort in the continent’s mineral space has been the Lobito Corridor project. The Lobito Corridor is an infrastructure railway initiative that aims to connect Angola, the DRC and Zambia in order to make mineral exporting more accessible. The USA co-launched the project with the EU in 2023, and it formed a major part of the Biden administration’s wider “Africa strategy.” Besides the Lobito Corridor, Washington has also invested in a portfolio of smaller mineral projects under the government’s International Development Finance Corporation. Whilst the USA may have been later to the critical mineral game than China, it is evident that Washington considers this sector to be a priority.
One of the main reasons why the USA prioritizes African minerals is geopolitical: African minerals are an alternative to Chinese minerals. China has a massive monopoly on certain minerals, and with graphite in particular, the USA is virtually 100% dependent on Beijing. China’s ability to leverage its monopoly has encouraged the USA to seek diversification. Since the pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, concepts like “nearshoring,” “reshoring” and “friendshoring” have become increasingly prevalent in US foreign policy, and this is mirrored in the critical mineral space. Trying to decrease dependency on Chinese minerals has been a consistent goal across the past few administrations, especially because of their role in national defense and military technologies. Although it may be too soon to tell what Trump’s government has in store, there is reason to expect the same overall strategy to continue: Trump signed at least 3 energy-related executive orders where reducing critical mineral dependency on adversaries was mentioned.
European Union
European states also lag behind China in terms of African critical minerals. Besides working on the Lobito Corridor project with Washington, the EU has signed agreements with numerous African states to secure access under multilateral initiatives. The bloc has worked bilaterally with countries like the DRC, Namibia, Rwanda and Zambia, and in each case, the EU aims to “enable African countries to integrate their raw materials and resources into sustainable global value chains.” Although African critical mineral engagement seems to be an increasing priority for the EU, the bloc has a long way to go if it seeks to reduce its dependency on Chinese minerals.
Like with the USA, Chinese dependency helps account for EU engagement in the African continent. China provides 100% of the EU’s supply of heavy rare earth elements, and this dependency puts the EU at greater risk in periods of high geopolitical tension. Besides geopolitics, the EU is also drawn to African critical minerals because of sustainability. As was mentioned earlier, minerals like copper and cobalt are crucial for the green transition, and they form the backbone of key technologies like solar panels or wind turbines. The EU wants to go climate neutral by 2050, and this ambitious ecological goal makes African critical minerals all the more attractive.
WHAT DOES THIS ‘RACE’ MEAN FOR AFRICA?
It is hard to deny that the rising demand for critical minerals will have massive implications for Africa. However, what is more debated is whether this increased engagement presents an opportunity or curse for the continent.
Curse?
One way of looking at this increased geopolitical competition is to frame it as a new ‘scramble for Africa.’ This view would argue that the African critical mineral market could become extractive and mirror the colonial institutions of the past. In the 20th century, Western states like Britain or France would exploit the continent’s natural resources and gave little to no compensation to local populations. Today, the critical mineral market draws some parallels to those extractive practices: even though Africa holds 30% of the world’s critical minerals, the continent only captures 10% of the revenue. An array of African countries find themselves at the bottom of the global value chain, which is why projects like the Lobito Corridor may not currently serve African interests.
If foreign powers like the EU and the USA ramp-up their engagement with the continent, there is a concern that critical minerals will incentivize a new form of ‘green neo-colonialism.’ Foreign mines, particularly Chinese ones have been criticised for environmental violations, human rights abuses and corruption, and the fear is that increased interest in the region could lead to even more damages. There is an African proverb that says “when an elephant fights, it is the grass that suffers.” In this saying, the EU, the USA and China are the ‘elephants,’ and Africa risks becoming the ‘grass.’
Opportunity?
In contrast, some scholarship sees the critical mineral race as a “window of opportunity” for Africa. According to the a Mckinsey report, the demand for critical minerals could help Africa generate up to £1.6 billion of additional revenue by 2030 and create up to 238 million jobs. These statistics help illustrate why many optimists see critical minerals as a golden ticket to economic development. If the continent can leverage its mineral wealth in a productive way, Africa could position itself as a central actor in the global energy transition.
For this "window of opportunity” to take real shape, Africa must be strategic and must prioritize its agency. Thus far, many African countries have been limited to raw material extraction, the least lucrative part of the mineral supply chain, and we have seen this take a toll on the DRC, and also states like Zambia. For the continent to really harness its mineral wealth, it must therefore focus on value-adding processes.
The way forwards
In terms of actual policies, inspiration can be taken from countries like Namibia. Namibia is trying to add value to its minerals by banning unprocessed, raw lithium exports. Doing so could help the southern African state generate greater revenue and other countries are following suit with similar, domestic-oriented action. That being said, export bans alone are insufficient to fully transform the African critical mineral economy, and other strategies must be employed simultaneously.
For one, African nations should work closely with organizations like the African Union. We have seen the African Union place an emphasis on leveraging mining endowments with instruments like the 2009 Africa Mining Vision and the 2018 African Minerals Governance Framework. Groups like the AU are key to unlocking Africa’s mineral potential, because they can increase the continent’s bargaining power in international negotiations.
Moreover, African nation states should prioritize good governance in the mining sector. Addressing ecological and humanitarian issues is vital, and states should prioritize developing infrastructure. All of these policies are by no means straightforward, and issues like political instability or corruption can act as significant barriers. However, if African states can collaborate to find creative ways to overcome these challenges, the continent could be a step closer to entering that “window of opportunity.”
SUMMARY
The demand for African critical minerals is growing at an unprecedented rate because lithium, cobalt and copper all play a pivotal role in the green transition. Critical minerals’ wide-ranging utility has attracted major engagement from China, the USA and the EU, and Africa currently finds itself in the middle of a new resource ‘race.’ The presence of foreign actors in Africa’s mining industry has been met with mixed criticism, with some citing ‘green neo-colonialism.’ For Africa to ensure that its mineral wealth acts as an opportunity and not as a curse, the continent must position itself more actively in global supply chains. This is not a simple task – political, economic and societal factors can make reform difficult. But, by prioritizing value-adding processes, by working with multilateral organizations and finally, by developing infrastructure, the continent may be able to proactively counteract the risk of “west shoring.”
Comments