Post #150

⚙️Instruments of Geopolitical Competition The competition over resources and markets does not always take the form of military engagements or commercial contracts. Sometimes it manifests as a race to set global requirements and standards of “responsible” behavior that can later be used against particular countries. 🌐 Mining 2030, a global mining-investor initiative backed by institutions overseeing about $18 trillion, has released a 10-year blueprint to make mining “responsible.” On paper, the plan calls for transparency, environmental accountability, and an end to illicit mining and trade. ⏩However, the initiative is dominated by Western, and its publication neatly coincides with the October 31–November 1 G7 meeting in Canada on environmental protection and minerals — a signal that a new large framework is being built to contain China’s clout in mineral supply chains. ⏪ Mining 2030’s vision for a responsible mining sector — key points: 🔸 Credible, independent performance standards 🔸 Responsible sourcing across value chains 🔸 Regulatory and institutional frameworks that promote effective sector governance 🔸 Equitable and sustainable benefits from mining 🔸 Reduction of conflicts linked to mineral extraction To achieve these goals, investors propose an International Minerals Agency, akin to the International Energy Agency created after the 1973 oil crisis to coordinate Western responses to supply risks. 🔸 This isn’t just ESG branding. The blueprint lands right after G7 ministers in Canada pushed “standards-based” critical-minerals markets and a strategy to diversify away from China, building on the June G7 Critical Minerals Action Plan (which also calls for transparency, diversification, security, and sustainable mining). The proposed agency and new buyer rules allow to hard-wire these standards into financing and procurement, steering offtake and capital toward non-Chinese routes. 🔸 If the agency idea sticks, miners that align with these standards may find cheaper capital and faster permits from G7 partners, while projects tied to Chinese processing — often labeled environmentally harmful — could face higher hurdles. The proposal also presses auto and big-tech buyers to prove “responsible” sourcing. 🔸The West has long used standards and responsibility as instruments to contain adversaries — primarily through economic means — from oil and gas in the 1970s to telecoms more recently, and now to critical minerals. Yet, as we’ve seen many times, the attractivenes of the Chinese model is exactly that it does not emphasize any “responsibility” and "requirements" at all. The risk is that worthy initiatives for responsible conduct get hijacked by political considerations and fail to improve ordinary people’s lives. Devils Below