Rare Earth Agreement: The Alliance Between the US, Australia, and the UK for Critical Supply

Have you got a question?

The so-called rare earths are a group of 17 chemical elements (including lanthanum, neodymium, dysprosium, and praseodymium), essential for the production of high-value technologies such as batteries, permanent magnets, wind turbines, semiconductors, microprocessors, and advanced electronic components. Despite their name, they are not particularly “rare” in the Earth’s crust, but their extraction and refining processes are complex, costly, and environmentally impactful. In recent years, rare earths have become a crucial strategic resource, both for the economic development of industrialized countries and for national security. Currently, China controls over 60% of global extraction and more than 85% of global refining of rare earths, making many Western economies heavily dependent on its industrial supply chain. This imbalance has led to growing attention from Western powers toward diversifying supply sources.

The New US–Australia–UK Trilateral Agreement

In early April 2025, the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom signed a strategic agreement aimed at strengthening cooperation in the rare earth supply chain. The agreement, part of the broader framework of economic-industrial alliances among allied nations (such as AUKUS), includes joint investments in extraction and refining facilities, the development of common standards for traceability and sustainability of materials, and cooperation in research, development, and specialized training. The partnership aims not only to reduce dependence on China but also to build a secure, resilient “Western” value chain that respects environmental regulations and labor rights. In particular, Australia—holding about 3% of global reserves and with a growing extraction capacity—becomes a central node of the strategy, while the US and UK contribute technological know-how, capital, and commercial regulatory tools.

Legal reflections and regulatory implications

From a legal standpoint, the agreement constitutes an intergovernmental partnership that does not create a customs union or economic zone but establishes a binding framework for bilateral and trilateral collaboration. Interestingly, the clauses of the agreement could serve as a foundation for setting new international standards for the responsible sourcing of critical raw materials. The European Commission, for instance, has already adopted the Critical Raw Materials Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/733), which aims to achieve at least 10% domestic extraction and 15% recycling of critical raw materials by 2030. Although the EU is not a party to the agreement, it may trigger indirect pressure to strengthen European

industrial policies in the mining and metallurgical sectors. At the same time, questions arise regarding the compatibility of such agreements with the multilateral trade rules under the WTO, particularly concerning potential export restrictions, sourcing preferences, or state support measures. Environmental and human rights considerations also demand attention: the extraction and refining of rare earths often have devastating impacts on local ecosystems and Indigenous communities. The implementation of binding standards and certification systems (modeled after the Kimberley Process for diamonds) will be crucial to avoid a resource race that sidelines sustainability.

The agreement between the US, UK, and Australia fits into a highly dynamic geopolitical and industrial context, marked by trade tensions with China and increasing competition over strategic resources. From a legal perspective, this agreement represents a hybrid model between diplomatic cooperation and the construction of resilient industrial supply chains, where international law and domestic regulations intersect with national security logic.

It is desirable that this alliance not degenerate into an exclusionary logic but rather foster, in the medium term, the emergence of a multilateral framework for fair, sustainable, and secure access to critical resources, with transparency mechanisms, environmental compliance, and respect for fundamental rights. The challenge, even for the European Union, will be to build a cohesive industrial policy that does not merely follow the lead of other alliances but promotes autonomous and sustainable technological sovereignty.