“Fossil fuel dependency is ripping away national security and sovereignty, and replacing it with subservience and rising costs,” UN climate change arm executive secretary Simon Stiell told European Union officials and Ministers in Brussels on March 16, 2026, against the backdrop of the U.S.-Israel-Iran war. He added that the disruption serves as an “abject lesson” on the pitfalls of banking on fossil fuels.

The war in West Asia has disproportionately affected economies such as India, which gets nearly 60% of its crude oil from the region. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has forced state-run refineries to declare force majeure — an act of god. Pushing a country like India to abandon its remaining coal or domestic gas reserves without a take-off ramp could lead to industrial collapse.

Mr. Stiell’s comments are reminiscent of the expressions of impatience by climate negotiators and stakeholders about how slow countries have been to switch away from fossil fuels: in 2021, activist Greta Thunberg called the COP26 climate talks “blah, blah, blah”.

The West used fossil fuels to build its strategic reserves and today can’t deny India and other countries like it the same opportunities, especially as the latter waits for its renewables infrastructure to mature and expand. At the same time, India’s reliance on fossil fuels from West Asia is obviously why its economy is currently hostage to the region’s geopolitical crisis.

Concentrated supply chains

Mr. Stiell et al. have argued that renewables are immune to such blockades, which is true in part: if the flow of fossil fuels stops today — it is pinched in the Strait of Hormuz — the ‘flow’ of energy also stops, because we burn fossil fuels to release energy. With renewables, the critical minerals are not the source of energy itself. Once the state has set up solar panels and erected wind turbines, their ability to generate energy cannot be embargoed because they will operate as long as the sun shines and the wind blows.

However, critical minerals still represent a significant bottleneck, with additional complications such as the number of industries that need them — from consumer electronics to missile targeting, with the renewable energy sector somewhere in between.

The supply chains for many minerals are even more concentrated than oil. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC+) controls around 40% of global oil production. However, while the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Australia plus Chile extract most of the cobalt and lithium, respectively, a single country — China — currently processes almost 60% of the world’s lithium, 70% of its cobalt, and 90% of rare-earth elements.

With renewable energy also making intensive use of hardware, a blockade of the required components, whether it be turbine blades or magnets based on rare earth minerals, would be just as effective as one of oil. At that point, it is once again a question of whether war could break out between the world’s primary mineral-processing hubs.

The “abject lesson” is only so abject because of the prevailing oil situation. If, say, the West Asia conflict had not begun and Brent crude was $65 a barrel, the trade-off for renewables could return to seeming like a moral luxury — in turn retrenching the value of ‘shock’ events like wars to push the world away from fossil fuels. And to that extent, perhaps Mr. Stiell et al. are smart to seize the chance.

Without a war driving prices up, the high upfront capital expenditure for renewables is less attractive to governments. If oil is cheap, the payback period for a large offshore wind farm might be 15 years; if gas prices jump 50%, this period could shrink to 4-5 years. In other words, sans a war, governments would have continued to place fiscal responsibility before energy sovereignty.

In the same scenario, the world’s dependencies on the critical mineral supply chain presents itself as a scarier prospect. If West Asia is stable and oil is flowing, the U.S. and its allies would likely view the option of trading West Asian oil for Chinese minerals as a net loss in strategic autonomy, which could encourage countries to reshore mineral mining and processing capabilities even before the energy transition picks up pace.

For India, a more stable supply of oil together with its arguably excessive focus on easing business could render its off-ramp into a long and gentle slope with room to continue using its domestic coal and cheap imported gas to power industrial growth while waiting for renewables to mature.

In other words, the Strait of Hormuz blockade could be forcing India to accelerate investments in renewables simply because it has no choice.

Ethics, not fear

Mr. Stiell is in effect wielding fear as his primary tool, especially when he says “dependency is ripping away national security”. The effects of fear never last — especially when countries imagine new ways to outmanoeuvre these threats – and neither do those of guilt. What ultimately matters is ethics. The virtue of renewables should be debated, and adopted, in order to save the planet for the 22nd century rather than for saving the economy for another month.

This also matters because when oil is cheap, the environmental damage of mining lithium, or human rights issues in Congolese cobalt mines are scrutinised more heavily by the public — and while this is as it should be, it should not just be because oil is cheap.

mukunth.v@thehindu.co.in

Published – March 26, 2026 07:45 am IST

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar joined US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other foreign delegates at the inaugural Critical Minerals Ministerial in Washington on Thursday to chalk out plans to reduce China’s dominance in the sector. India underlined the challenges of “excessive concentration” and the importance of de-risking supply chains through structured international cooperation, the minister said.

He also highlighted India’s efforts towards greater resilience through initiatives including National Critical Minerals Mission, Rare Earth Corridors and responsible commerce and conveyed support to the FORGE initiative on critical minerals.

The US hosted the inaugural forum bringing together delegations from over 50 countries to advance collaboration on securing and diversifying global critical mineral supply chains. Rubio said the initiative is meant to create a reliable global supply chains in critical minerals and processed and finished materials.

“Some countries have a number of critical minerals that they have available to them in terms of mining, but just haven’t been able to do it because a foreign competitor will come in, they’ll gut the price, they’ll undercut it through state subsidies and unfair practices, and so it becomes economically unviable to be able to explore for critical minerals,” he said, in a tacit reference to China’s policies.

Beijing controls 95% of critical minerals production and refining capacity in the world. That level of control is being used as a tool of leverage in geopolitics and also lends itself to disruptions like a pandemic or political instability, Rubio said.

China has used rare earths and permanent magnets export curbs during trade negotiations with the US. These minerals and technologies are important for manufacturing goods like solar panels, mobile phones and electric vehicle batteries.

US Vice President JD Vance invited allies and partners to work together to reshape the global critical minerals market, highlighting its role in modern economies. 

ALSO READ: India, Canada to Anchor Trade in Energy, Critical Minerals

Japan’s drilling-equipped research vessel Chikyu before its departure from Shimizu port to conduct a test recovery of rare-earth–rich mud near Minamitori Island, marking the world’s first attempt to continuously lift rare-earth seabed sludge from a depth of about 6 km onto a ship, in Shimizu, Shizuoka prefecture, Japan on January 12, 2026.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

U.S. President Donald Trump and Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese sign an agreement on rare earth and critical minerals during a meeting in the Cabinet Room at the White House, in Washington, D.C., U.S., on October 20, 2025.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

A villager poses with lithium stones in Jammu and Kashmir’s Reasi district.
| Photo Credit: PTI

The story so far: In late June, the Centre declared the winning bidders for mining rights in six blocks of critical minerals, including graphite, phosphorite and lithium, for which India largely relies on imports. These are the first private players awarded such rights under the revamped Mines and Minerals law.

Why are critical minerals important?

Minerals such as copper, lithium, nickel, cobalt are known as critical minerals, as they along with some rare earth elements, are essential for the world’s ongoing efforts to switch to greener and cleaner energy. As per the International Energy Agency (IEA), lithium demand rose by 30% in 2023, followed by nickel, cobalt, graphite and rare earth elements which saw an 8% to 15% growth, with the aggregate value of such minerals pegged at $325 billion. In its Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2024 report, the agency has flagged that the world’s goal to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius in the net zero emissions scenario, would translate into very rapid growth in demand for these minerals. By 2040, the demand for copper is expected to rise 50%, double for nickel, cobalt and rare earth elements, quadruple for graphite and eightfold for lithium, which is crucial for batteries. The development of sustainable supply chains for such minerals is, therefore, an unavoidable task. In India, the lack of ready reserves of critical minerals has resulted in 100% import dependence for minerals like lithium, cobalt, and nickel. Late last month, Union Mines Minister G. Kishan Reddy highlighted that 95% of India’s copper requirements are met through imports. China is a key supplier or processor of many of these items.

What is being done to spur production?

While India has natural reserves of some of these minerals, they haven’t been explored or tapped fully. For instance, India holds 11% of the world’s deposits of ilmenite, the main source of titanium dioxide used in many applications, but still imports a billion dollars of titanium dioxide a year, former Mines Secretary Vivek Bharadwaj once pointed out. Then there is the “lucky” discovery of lithium reserves in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) while the Geological Survey of India (GSI) was exploring the State’s terrain for limestone, which triggered hope of some self-sufficiency in the mineral. Announced as the first discovery of lithium in the country last February, these reserves were pegged at 5.9 million tonnes, enthusing the government to expedite its tapping.

Acknowledging that reliance on a few nations for the ores and processing of these minerals could pose significant vulnerabilities for Indian supply chains, the central government amended the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 in August 2023 to enable it to grant mining concessions for 24 critical and strategic minerals. By November, the first auctions of 20 critical mineral blocks, with the lithium block identified in J&K’s Reasi district on the list, were launched, followed by two more tranches with 18 more blocks offered this February and March. However, investor interest has been tepid — the auction of most of the first 20 blocks was scrapped for lack of adequate bidders. After a delayed process, the Mines Ministry on June 24, announced six winners from the maiden auction tranche for three blocks in Odisha, and one each in Tamil Nadu, U.P. and Chhattisgarh. The outcomes of the second and third round of auctions are still awaited, while the Ministry has initiated a fourth tranche, which includes 10 blocks that are being offered for the second time.

Why are some blocks not finding takers?

Among the first attempt blocks offered in the latest auction, two phosphorite blocks along with a glauconite block are in Chhattisgarh, while two blocks each are up for grabs in U.P. (phosphorite and rare earth elements), Karnataka (phosphate and nickel), and Rajasthan (potash and halite). A graphite block is being auctioned in Jharkhand and Arunachal Pradesh, with five additional blocks of graphite, tungsten and vanadium offered in the northeastern State for the second time. The ‘second attempt’ blocks also include a tungsten reserve in Tamil Nadu’s Madurai district, a cobalt and manganese block in Karnataka’s Shimoga, and a chromium and nickel block in Sindhudurg, Maharashtra.

As per industry experts, the reasons for low interest among miners for some of these blocks include the lack of adequate data on the potential reserves buried within them. Technology challenges also affect outcomes. For instance, the lithium block in J&K has clay deposits, and the technology for the mineral’s extraction from clay remains untested globally, pointed out Girishkumar Kadam, senior vice-president and group head for corporate sector ratings at ICRA.

When is domestic production likely to begin?

Given the preliminary stage of exploration for most of the domestic blocks being auctioned, their commercialisation and associated benefits are unlikely to fully accrue in the current decade ending 2030, ICRA said. “India’s manufacturing is thus likely to remain exposed to potential future supply shocks of these minerals till then,” it concluded. Apart from spurring exploration and attracting more miners, the Centre is looking to acquire overseas assets from key resource-rich regions as a parallel measure to bolster mineral security. The first such mine, for lithium brine, was acquired in Argentina this year by Khanij Bidesh India Limited, a joint venture of NALCO, Hindustan Copper, and Mineral Exploration Company. While it scouts for more assets, India has also joined the U.S.-led Mineral Security Partnership, a block consisting of large buyers and sellers of critical minerals.

China’s Premier Li Qiang inspects a hydrogen refuelling truck as Executive Chairman of Fortescue Andrew Forrest (C) looks on at the Fortescue Hazelmere research and development facility in Hazelmere, a suburb of Perth on June 18, 2024.
| Photo Credit: AFP

Chinese Premier Li Qiang has ended his Australian tour on June 18 in the west coast city of Perth where he has focused on China’s investment in critical minerals, clean energy and business links.

Perth is the capital of Western Australia State, which provided 39% of the world’s iron ore last year. Iron ore is one of Australia’s most lucrative exports. Analysts say the commodity was spared the type of trade bans that Beijing imposed on other Australian exports as bilateral relations soured three years ago because the steel-making ingredient was crucial to Chinese industrial growth.

Last week, Mr. Li became the first Chinese premier to visit New Zealand then Australia in seven years. He left Perth late on June 18 for Malaysia, where he’ll be China’s first premier to visit since 2015.

While in Perth, China’s second-most powerful leader after President Xi Jinping inspected iron ore miner Fortescue’s clean energy research facility.

Fortescue’s chairman Andrew Forrest said Mr.Li was interested in the company’s plans to produce iron ore without carbon emissions and potentially “green iron.” “I think China chose us because it’s not just the best technology to go green in Australia, it’s the best technology to go green in the world and we’ve got real examples of it in trains, ship engines, trucks,” Forrest told The Associated Press before the visit.

The Perth facility is testing technology on hydrogen, ammonia and batter power for trains, ships, trucks and heavy mining equipment.

Focuses on Critical Minerals

Mr. Li also visited Chinese-controlled Tianqi Lithium Energy Australia’s processing plant south of Perth to underscore China’s interest in investing in critical minerals. The plant produces battery-grade lithium hydroxide for electric vehicles.

Australia shares U.S. concerns over China’s global dominance in critical minerals and control over supply chains in the renewable energy sector.

Citing Australia’s national interests, Treasurer Jim Chalmers recently ordered five Chinese-linked companies to divest their shares in the rare earth mining company Northern Minerals.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wrote in an opinion piece published in Perth’s main newspaper, The West Australian, on June 18, that his government was acting to ensure foreign investment “continues to serve our national interests.”

“This includes reforming the foreign investment framework so that it’s more efficient, more transparent and more effective at managing risk,” Mr. Albanese wrote.

Mr. Forrest said the national risk from Chinese investment in the critical minerals sector was overstated.

“Australia should be producing all the critical minerals in the world because we’re a great mining country, so by all means let’s go in harder after critical minerals, but let’s not do it with panic because there is no reason for panic,” Mr. Forrest said.

Mr. Qiang and Mr. Albanese flew to Perth in separate planes late on June 17 from the national capital Canberra where the two leaders held an official annual meeting with senior ministers in Parliament House.

Both leaders attended a round table of business leaders in Perth representing resource companies including mining giants BHP and Rio Tinto.

Business Council of Australia chief executive Bran Black said business dialogue was essential to the bilateral relations between the two free trading partners.

“While there have been challenging times in the bilateral relationship between the two nations, I think it’s fair to say this is another positive point of progress,” Black told the meeting.

“It shows that whilst the parameters of a bilateral relationship are set by governments, they will always be sustained by the quality of the personal relationships and especially those personal relationships that subsist on a business-to-business level,” Black added.

Chinese premiers and Australian prime ministers met annually from 2013 until 2019, after which Beijing banned minister-to-minister contacts over the previous conservative government’s call for an independent investigation into the causes of and responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Relations had already been strained by Australian legislation that banned covert foreign interference in Australian politics and the exclusion of Chinese-owned telecommunications giant Huawei from rolling out the national 5G network due to securit

Beijing initiated a reset in relations after Mr.Anthony Albanese’s center-left Labor Party was elected in 2022.

The annual meetings resumed when Mr. Albanese visited Beijing in November last year.

Concerns over press freedom

Mr. Albanese revealed that his office had complained to the Chinese Embassy about the behavior of two officials during a media event with the two leaders after June 17th meeting.

Australia had “concerns” about two Chinese officials who stood in the way of cameras taking images of well-known Australian journalist Cheng Lei sitting with other reporters as the leaders spoke, Mr. Albanese said.

Mrs. Cheng spent more than three years in detention in China for breaking an embargo with a broadcast on a state-run TV network while she was based in Beijing. She was released last year after interventions by the Australian government and now works for Sky News Australia.

“When you look at the footage, it was a pretty clumsy attempt, frankly, by a couple of people to stand in between where the cameras were and where Mrs. Cheng Lei was sitting,” Mr. Albanese said.

“There should be no impediments to Australian journalists going about their job and we’ve made that clear to the Chinese Embassy,” Mr. Albanese added.

Chinese-born Cheng told Sky News on June 17 that the officials “went to great lengths to block me from the cameras and to flank me.” “I’m only guessing that it’s to prevent me from saying something or doing something that they think would be a bad look. But that in itself was a bad look,” Mrs. Cheng said.

The embassy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Li and Mr. Albanese made statements during the press event but neither took questions from the assembled journalists.