The United States faces an increasingly urgent challenge: a growing dependence on China, its economic rival and geopolitical adversary, for critical technologies that underpin both national security and economic stability. Critical minerals for most emerging technologies are now almost wholly mined and processed in China. The United States heavily relies upon China for manufacturing tools and processing equipment. This industrial dominance is not accidental. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has invested so substantially in such capabilities that a policy term has emerged of “China, Inc.” to denote the CCP’s whole-of-government and whole-of-industry approach to dominating technologies. The United States is thus challenged to independently manufacture the systems needed for its defense industrial base, and reliable supply chains for the U.S. private sector are increasingly difficult to create, navigate, and sustain. However, opportunities exist to wield national-based policies to return U.S. manufacturing autonomy.
China’s latest announcements of export restrictions on critical minerals and machining tools are particularly disruptive to U.S. industry. They are designed by the CCP to return global manufacturing dominance to China and to wield its leverage over the U.S. military supply chain. In July 2023, China restricted exports of gallium and germanium, two essential materials for semiconductor manufacturing. In September 2024, China announced export restrictions on antimony, a critical element for semiconductors and batteries. On January 2, 2025, China expanded its export control list to include 28 U.S. entities, including General Dynamics, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon, all key defense contractors. On the same day, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce proposed additional export restrictions targeting technologies used to manufacture energy storage components and process lithium and gallium.
These moves are not isolated. They are part of a strategic playbook designed to reassert China’s manufacturing dominance and exert pressure on U.S. supply chains—particularly those supporting the defense and energy sectors.
While the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Energy (DOE) have made recent investments to revitalize rare earth elements production – such as the DOD’s partnership with MP Materials - developing new mines often takes up to a decade, including exploration, permitting, construction, and commissioning. Domestic production of critical manufacturing tools and equipment is also challenged in the short term, as such complex systems involve both hardware and software, and a China-dominated supply base.
We face a critical choice: either maintain the status quo and allow China’s grip on critical supply chains to tighten, or engage head-on with new national policies designed to counter China’s influence and restore America’s industrial and technological independence.
Opportunities for Proactive National Policies
To counter China’s resource policies, the United States can build upon prior work and adopt a comprehensive, nationally oriented, three-pillar approach for restoring U.S. manufacturing autonomy. First, the U.S. Government should create a strategic stockpile of critical minerals used in semiconductor and energy storage manufacturing if prices are favorable, as well as significantly invest in critical minerals mining and processing. Creating a critical minerals reserve would help secure domestic supply chains and take advantage of fluctuating market conditions, as sometimes materials are sold below production costs. Further investments in critical minerals mines, both inside our borders as well as mines located within our allies’ borders, should be made to reduce dependence upon China. We should expect such mines to be unprofitable – rare earth elements markets are notoriously fickle with pricing variations driven by China – so federal subsidies for extended periods should be planned.
Second, to compete with China’s industrial scale, the U.S. Government should infuse investments across supply chains, including mining, processing, manufacturing, and recycling for multiple emerging technologies. Innovation ecosystems – in which interconnected networks of emerging technology startups, research organizations, public and private investors, and large companies combine to promote and support accelerated innovation - offer a powerful tool to help secure our national and economic security. As such, a whole-of-country approach is needed to strategically invest in multi-state, public-private partnerships. Through unified efforts the United States can compete with China’s full-force efforts underway across the technology spectrum.
An example of such leadership from the DOD is the BEACONS initiative at the University of Texas at Dallas. BEACONS fast-tracks energy storage innovation to reclaim domestic authority, closing critical battery technology and manufacturing excellence gaps. It works with U.S. companies to drive transformative energy storage solutions essential to defense, industry growth, and economic stability from mining to cells to systems. A recent Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signing between UT Dallas and Argonne National Laboratory highlights potential partnerships that can come from such investments. Recognizing the value of such efforts, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) approved the FY26 NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), which “…recommends the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment consider establishing a National Energy Storage Systems (NESS) initiative as part of the Industrial Resilience Consortium.” If established, the NESS program would enable national coordination of leading energy storage experts from industry, academia, and national and DOD labs to address critical warfighter needs and create dual-use applications. This approach can and should be replicated across other critical emerging technologies.
Third, by leveraging U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence (AI) innovation, domestic manufacturing may accelerate and ultimately obviate dependence on adversaries. AI can streamline processes and save manufacturing costs, such as in autonomous systems for high-mix production, training, and network-based manufacturing for modular production hubs. New advanced materials can be developed from scratch by applied AI first, saving years of experimentation. By strategically deploying AI-based manufacturing, the United States can leapfrog China in key areas of production.
The United States stands at a critical decision point in technological leadership. Without immediate and coordinated actions in a whole-of-country approach, we face severe threats to our national security and economic stability. By promptly implementing the above recommendations for proactive national policies, the United States can avert supply chain crises, maintain its global leadership in technology, and protect its national security interests.
About the Author
Thomas A. Campbell, Ph.D., serves as the co-PI on the BEACONS program, a DOD-funded program focused on building a sustainable future for the nation through energy storage innovation, education, and collaboration. He is also co-founder & growth director of LEAP Manufacturing, a national consortium of experts and organizations with the goal to be a leading force for developing new technology ecosystems in areas such as energy, critical materials, and artificial intelligence. Dr. Campbell was the first National Intelligence Officer for Technology (NIO-TECH) with the National Intelligence Council (NIC) in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Prior to his government service, he was Research Associate Professor and Associate Director for Outreach with the Institute for Critical Technology and Applied Science (ICTAS) at Virginia Tech for over six years, and he worked over eight years in private industry. Dr. Campbell is a recipient of the Alexander von Humboldt Research Fellowship, granted to global researchers for post-doctoral research in Germany. Living in Freiburg, Germany for 16 months, he executed all his research in the German language. He holds a Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering Sciences from the University of Colorado at Boulder, and a B.E. in Mechanical Engineering from Vanderbilt University. He can be reached at [email protected].
