The US needs Canada to win the critical minerals race
Key takeaways
- The more immediate question is whether the U.S. can build reliable, commercially viable supply chains with the partners it already has.
- The U.S. can and should increase domestic production, but no serious strategy can rely on domestic production alone.
- It produces or holds significant potential in many of the minerals that matter most to the U.S., including nickel, cobalt, graphite, lithium, copper, rare earths, uranium, tungsten, potash and aluminum.
Why this matters: political developments that affect policy direction and public trust.
That is true but incomplete. The more immediate question is whether the U.S. can build reliable, commercially viable supply chains with the partners it already has. And at the top of that list is Canada.
Critical minerals are not just about mining. They are about batteries, semiconductors, defense systems, electric motors, transmission infrastructure, nuclear technologies and the advanced manufacturing platforms that will define economic and national security in the coming decades. The U.S. can and should increase domestic production, but no serious strategy can rely on domestic production alone. Supply chains are too complex, investment needs too large and timelines too long.
Canada offers a practical answer. It produces or holds significant potential in many of the minerals that matter most to the U.S., including nickel, cobalt, graphite, lithium, copper, rare earths, uranium, tungsten, potash and aluminum. Its Critical Minerals Strategy is designed not only to expand extraction, but also to strengthen processing, manufacturing, recycling, infrastructure and partnerships with Indigenous communities, provinces, industry and allies.