MONOPOLY CAPITALI$M

Rio Tinto-Glencore merger may need asset sales to win over China

Reuters | January 16, 2026 | 

Oyu Tolgoi open pit has been producing since 2012. (Image courtesy of Turquoise Hill.)

The proposed tie-up between Rio Tinto and Glencore could require asset sales to secure regulatory approval from top commodity buyer China, which has longstanding concerns about resource security and market concentration.

The two mining giants revealed last week that for the second time in two years they were in early merger talks – potentially creating the world’s largest mining company with a market value of more than $200 billion.

But analysts and lawyers said the scale of their sales to China means any deal will need approval from Beijing, as have past mining mega-deals such as Glencore’s $35 billion purchase of Xstrata in 2013.

China’s antitrust regulator is likely to be concerned about a combined entity’s concentration in copper production and marketing as well as iron ore marketing, several analysts and lawyers told Reuters. Beijing may also see an opportunity to force asset sales to friendly entities, they added.

Even before the Glencore talks were made public, Rio Tinto had already been exploring an asset-for-equity swap aimed at trimming the 11% holding of its biggest shareholder, state-run Aluminium Corporation of China, known as Chinalco. Rio Tinto’s Simandou iron ore mine in Guinea and Oyu Tolgoi copper mine in Mongolia were among the assets of interest to Chinalco, sources said then.

To get the Glencore deal over the line, assets in Africa are especially likely sales candidates as Latin America has become less accepting of Chinese investment, according to Glyn Lawcock, an analyst at Barrenjoey in Sydney.

“China will see this as an opportunity to squeeze out assets,” he said.

China’s commerce ministry, its market regulator and Chinalco did not respond to questions about the deal. Glencore and Rio Tinto declined to comment.

Glencore precedent

Glencore has been here before. In 2013, Chinese regulators forced the Swiss-based company to sell its stake in the Las Bambas copper mine in Peru, one of the world’s largest, to Chinese investors for nearly $6 billion in exchange for blessing its takeover of Xstrata.

“The Las Bambas deal is still looked at as a very successful solution and it’s going to be a potential playbook that regulators can draw on,” a China-based partner at an international law firm said on condition of anonymity.

Glencore also agreed to sell Chinese customers minimum quantities of copper concentrate at certain prices for just over seven years as Beijing was concerned the merged group would have too much power over the copper market.

 

Rio Tinto, Glencore mull ASX coal spin-off

Cecilia Jamasmie | January 15, 2026

Glencore is one of Australia’s largest coal exporters, operating 13 mines in New South Wales and Queensland. (Image courtesy of Glencore.)

Rio Tinto (RIO) and Glencore (GLEN) are said to be examining whether a coal-heavy business could be spun off into an ASX-listed vehicle as part of early-stage talks on a potential merger that would create the world’s largest mining company.

The companies confirmed last week they are discussing a possible combination of some or all of their businesses, sparking speculation about how assets that sit awkwardly together would be handled, particularly coal and Glencore’s lucrative trading arm. 

“All we know is that they are trying to hammer out important details, like the price, the premium, who would run the new company, exactly what structure it would have,” Clara Ferreira Marques, Bloomberg’s Asia-Pacific head of commodities, said on the The Australia Podcast on Thursday.

“They’re hiring banking teams to help them do that, and they really have to come up with some sort of proposal by the fifth of February to meet the UK takeover panel rules.”

One option under consideration is carving out coal assets, potentially into a separately listed Australian vehicle, echoing BHP’s (ASX, LON: BHP) South32 demerger a decade ago.

Glencore’s coal operations across NSW, Queensland, central Africa and Latin America would account for about 8% of a combined group’s $45.6 billion in EBITDA and could be worth tens of billions of dollars. Glencore’s trading arm, which would represent about 9% of earnings, remains another sensitive piece of the puzzle.

Analysts have also floated alternatives, including Glencore spinning off coal ahead of any transaction or Rio bidding only for Glencore’s copper assets, following Glencore’s decision last year to abandon a self-driven coal separation.

Why now

The renewed talks come as pressures that were present a year ago have intensified, particularly around copper, scale and market positioning.

“What has changed since the last time they held talks is that some of the issues that were already there a year ago have become a lot more stark,” Ferreira Marques said. “You look at the copper price, we’re now over $13,000 a tonne. That makes the case for adding copper to your portfolio not only compelling, but urgent.”

Courtesy of Benchmark’s Copper Service.

She added that Rio’s recent share price performance has improved the financial logic of a deal, while the sector’s shrinking relative size has become harder to ignore. 

Demand for the metal is anticipated to rise by as much as 50% by 2040, according to S&P Global Energy & Market Intelligence, leading to a projected production deficit of up to 10 million tonnes annually by that time.

A Rio Tinto-Glencore tie-up would position the new company as the leading copper producer globally, accounting for approximately 7% of the world’s output.

“You look at Rio Tinto at about $141 billion, and then you look at Nvidia at $4.5 trillion,” she said. “The problem of scale is very important. It’s not just about being the biggest, it’s about being able to attract generalist investors, talent and opportunities.”

1. Includes copper demand from construction, cooling, appliances, fossil power generation, machinery and internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. 2. Includes copper demand from clean energy technologies, transmission and distribution and EVs. (Courtesy of S&P’s Copper in the Age of AI.)

Leadership changes have also helped reset the dynamic. Rio now has a new chief executive in Simon Trott and a more deal-minded chair in Dominic Barton, while Glencore is led by Gary Nagle, who has called the tie-up the “most obvious” deal in mining. 

Previous talks in late 2024 stalled over valuation, culture and control, but people familiar with the discussions say both sides now appear more open to compromise.

Hurdles ahead

Price remains the primary obstacle, followed closely by cultural fit, coal exposure and regulatory risk. Rio exited thermal coal in 2018, and some investors remain constrained by mandates that bar coal holdings, even as the political climate in the US has softened and coal profitability has endured longer than expected.

Antitrust scrutiny would be significant, particularly given China’s role as a major stakeholder in Rio, and the operational risks tied to Glencore’s copper assets in jurisdictions such as the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Speculation that BHP could attempt to disrupt the talks with a rival bid for Glencore has so far been played down.

“At this point, it’s unlikely,” Ferreira Marques said. “BHP is not a company that jumps on things at the last minute. The signalling is very much that they wouldn’t step in.” 

She cautioned, however, that early-stage deals can still unravel. “When companies talk about an M&A deal, they basically tell the world that they need to do something,” she said, adding that BHP’s earlier bid for Anglo American (LON: AAL) helped reopen the door to mega-deals across the sector.

Whether the talks culminate in a full merger that gives rise to a GlenTinto, a RioCore or something else entirely, a partial asset deal or yet another false start, the discussions underscore how urgently the world’s biggest miners are hunting for growth in an increasingly copper-constrained world.

Copper assets are in even higher demand today given the metal’s role in the green transition and artificial intelligence. Rio Tinto and Glencore are shifting their focus to the metal, as are rival miners including Australia’s BHP.

Chinese regulators will also be examining a planned $53 billion copper-focused merger between Anglo American and Teck Resources, Teck CEO Jonathan Price said in September.

Political challenges

Copper’s rising importance is politicizing the metal. The White House has alluded to China’s dominance over the supply chain as a direct threat to national security, and it remains to be seen how it would react to major mineral asset sales to Chinese interests.

A combined Rio Tinto-Glencore would market about 17% of global copper supply, according to Lawcock, although analysts at Barclays say the share of mine production is only 7.5% and unlikely to trigger major antitrust concerns.

Nonetheless politics has doomed deals before.

US chipmaker Qualcomm walked away from a $44 billion deal to buy NXP Semiconductors in 2018 after failing to get approval from Chinese regulators in what was seen as a response to the trade war then underway between Washington and Beijing. The inability to get Chinese regulators on board similarly sank Nvidia’s proposed takeover of Arm Ltd.

In previous resource deals, however, Beijing has given approval as part of a bargain. A year before the sale of Las Bambas, Beijing required major changes to a tie-up between Japan’s Marubeni and US grain merchant Gavilon, citing food security concerns.

“Clearly this would be a long, complicated deal from a regulatory approval perspective,” Mark Kelly, CEO of advisory firm MKI Global Partners, wrote in a note, “and the presence of Chinalco on Rio’s shareholder register always complicates this picture further.”

(By Lewis Jackson, Amy Lv, Melanie Burton, Anousha Sakoui and Clara Denina; Editing by Veronica Brown, Tony Munroe and Jamie Freed)

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

South Korea’s former first lady took bribes and meddled in state affairs, prosecutor says

Special prosecutor alleges Kim Keon Hee took advantage of her status as president's spouse ‘to receive money and expensive valuables’

Kim Keon Hee arrives for her first trial hearing on corruption charges at the Seoul Central District Court on 24 September 2025 (Getty)

Alisha Rahaman Sarkar

Monday 29 December 2025 
The Independent

 South Korean prosecutor on Monday alleged that the wife of the impeached president Yoon Suk Yeol allegedly accepted bribes totalling over $200,000 and interfered in state affairs.

The special prosecutor's investigation into the former first lady, which wrapped up on Sunday, came amid a year-long probe into the disgraced president’s brief imposition of martial law last year and related scandals linked to the once-powerful couple.

Kim Keon Hee was arrested in August and placed under investigation for allegedly manipulating stocks and receiving gifts from the cult-like Unification Church. She is also accused of meddling in elections.

The prosecutor earlier this month sought a 15-year prison sentence for Ms Kim, who denied wrongdoing and, during a court hearing, apologised to the public for sparking concerns through her conduct.

Ms Kim “took advantage of the status of the president's spouse to receive money and expensive valuables, and has been widely involved in various personnel appointments and nominations," special prosecutor Min Joong Ki said at a news conference marking the end of his investigation.

She "illegally intervened in state affairs behind the scenes, beyond the public's view", the prosecutor said, adding that the bribes from businesses and politicians taken by her totalled up to $263,000.

Ms Kim previously said that the allegations were "deeply unjust". "Yet when I consider my role and the responsibilities entrusted to me, it seems clear that I have made many mistakes," she claimed.

A lower court’s ruling in Ms Kim’s case is expected on 28 January.

“Investigations do not end because one says so, but are eventually completed with evidence in court," Ms Kim's lawyers said in a statement on Monday, adding that they would work "to ensure that procedural legitimacy and defence rights are thoroughly guaranteed so that facts are not exaggerated or distorted into political framing”.


The prosecutors are also trying Unification Church leader Han Hak Ja as her group is suspected of giving Ms Kim valuables, including Chanel bags and a diamond necklace, as part of an effort to win influence.

Ms Kim allegedly also received a painting by famed South Korean minimalist painter Lee Ufan, a Dior handbag and a watch.

Ms Han denies directing her church to bribe the then first lady.

"Various people who did not have a common denominator with each other visited Kim Keon Hee, not the president, and asked for what they wanted, and gave money and goods," assistant special prosecutor Kim Hyeong Geun, alleged. "As a result, their request was realised."

Mr Yoon is on trial for masterminding an insurrection by imposing martial law late last year, a charge that could mean a life sentence or even a death penalty. He denies the charges.

A lower court ruling on Mr Yoon is expected early next year.

MONOPOLY CAPITALI$M

Chevron: the only foreign oil company left in Venezuela


By AFP
December 23, 2025


Chevron currently extract oil from four fields and offshore gas from another field in Venezuela - Copyright AFP Yuri CORTEZ

The US oil company Chevron is walking a tightrope amid tensions between Washington and Caracas to retain its fragile position as the only foreign company allowed to exploit Venezuela’s oil reserves —- the largest in the world.

Washington’s total blockade of oil tankers, added last week to punishing US sanctions, has put Chevron and its presence in Venezuela back in the spotlight.



– Why is Chevron in Venezuela? –



The Venezuelan Gulf Oil Company, Chevron’s predecessor in Venezuela, was founded in April 1923 and began operating its first well in August 1924.

Initially operating near Lake Maracaibo, it then moved on to new deposits such as Urumaco and Boscan. Most reserves are now in the Orinoco Belt.

Gulf Oil merged with Standard Oil of California in 1984, forming the giant now known as Chevron.

The group currently extracts oil from four fields and offshore gas from another field, covering a total area of nearly 30,000 hectares (115 square miles).

This is part of a partnership with the state-owned company PDVSA and its affiliates that employs around 3,000 people.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), in 2023, Venezuelan territory contained around 303 billion barrels, or about 17 percent of the world’s reserves.

The US embargo on Venezuelan crude oil, in place since 2019, was relaxed in 2023 with licenses to operate in the country.

But President Donald Trump revoked them all in the first half of 2025 before granting an exception to Chevron.

Yet, according to an industry expert, recent presidential decisions do not affect the group’s activities.

“We believe our presence continues to be a stabilizing force for the local economy, the region and US energy security,” the company told AFP, assuring that it operates in compliance with the law and “sanctions frameworks provided by the US government.”

Other foreign oil companies do not operate inside Venezuela because of the US embargo and a Venezuelan law that requires foreign firms to partner with PDVSA in majority state-owned ventures, a structure Chevron accepted when it was imposed.



– How many barrels? –



According to Stephen Schork, an analyst at the Schork Group consulting firm, Venezuela’s total production is around 800,000 to 900,000 barrels per day compared to more than 3 million at its peak.

With its license, Chevron generates around 10 percent of Venezuela’s production, although sources differ on the exact figure.

This currently represents around 150,000 to 200,000 barrels per day, 100 percent of which is exported to the United States.

But the oil is high-sulfur “sludge,” said Schork.

“It is heavy, nasty stuff. You can’t move this oil in a pipeline,” and it’s the hardest to refine, he explained.

Because of the embargo, Caracas is forced to sell its oil on the black market at heavy discounts, mainly to Asia.

But the new US blockade is expected to significantly reduce these illicit exports — by up to 50 percent according to experts.



– Does US need the oil? –



The United States has refineries around the Gulf of Mexico that were specifically designed decades ago to process this highly viscous Venezuelan oil.

Due to its lower quality, it is converted into diesel or by-products such as asphalt, rather than gasoline for cars.

“The United States does not need this oil,” noted Schork.

If they want it, he believes, it is for political reasons.

They want to “prevent the vacuum created by their departure from being filled by countries that do not share their values, such as China and Russia,” according to a source close to the matter.

UN experts slam US blockade on Venezuela


By AFP
December 24, 2025


US forces have launched dozens of deadly air strikes on boats that Washington alleges were transporting drugs - Copyright AFP Miguel J. Rodriguez Carrillo

Four United Nations rights experts on Wednesday condemned the US partial naval blockade of Venezuela, determining it illegal armed aggression and calling on the US Congress to intervene.

The United States has deployed a major military force in the Caribbean and has recently intercepted oil tankers as part of a naval blockade against Venezuelan vessels it considers to be under sanctions.

“There is no right to enforce unilateral sanctions through an armed blockade,” the UN experts said in a joint statement.

A blockade is a prohibited use of military force against another country under the UN Charter, they added.

“It is such a serious use of force that it is also expressly recognised as illegal armed aggression under the General Assembly’s 1974 Definition of Aggression,” they said.

“As such, it is an armed attack under article 51 of the Charter — in principle giving the victim state a right of self-defence.”

US President Donald Trump accuses Venezuela of using oil, the South American country’s main resource, to finance “narcoterrorism, human trafficking, murders, and kidnappings”.

Caracas denies any involvement in drug trafficking. It says Washington is seeking to overthrow its president, Nicolas Maduro, in order to seize Venezuelan oil reserves, the largest in the world.

Since September, US forces have launched dozens of air strikes on boats that Washington alleges, without showing evidence, were transporting drugs. More than 100 people have been killed.



– Congress should ‘intervene’ –



“These killings amount to violations of the right to life. They must be investigated and those responsible held accountable,” said the experts.

“Meanwhile, the US Congress should intervene to prevent further attacks and lift the blockade,” they added.

They called on countries to take measures to stop the blockade and illegal killings, and bring perpetrators justice.

The four who signed the joint statement are: Ben Saul, special rapporteur on protecting human rights while countering terrorism; George Katrougalos, the expert on promoting a democratic and equitable international order; development expert Surya Deva; and Gina Romero, who covers the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

UN experts are independent figures mandated by the UN Human Rights Council to report their findings. They do not, therefore, speak for the United Nations itself.

On Tuesday at the UN in New York, Venezuela, having requested an emergency meeting of the Security Council, accused Washington of “the greatest extortion known in our history”.

Trump ‘Choosing From the War Crimes Menu’ With ‘Quarantine’ on Venezuela Oil Exports

“Economic strangulation is warfare and civilians always pay the price,” lamented CodePink.


Oil tankers are seen anchored in Lake Maracaibo, Venezuela on December 4, 2025.
(Photo by José Bula Urrutia/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
Dec 25, 2025
COMMON DREAMS

President Donald Trump has ordered US military forces to further escalate their aggression against Venezuela by enforcing a “quarantine” on the South American nation’s oil—by far its main export—in what one peace group called an attempted act of “economic strangulation.”

“While military options still exist, the focus is to first use economic pressure by enforcing sanctions to reach the outcome the White House is looking [for],” a US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Reuters.

The move follows the deployment of an armada of US warships and thousands of troops to the region, threats to invade Venezuela, oil tanker seizures off the Venezuelan coast, Trump’s authorization of covert CIA action against the socialist government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and airstrikes against boats allegedly running drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean that have killed more than 100 people in what critics say are murders and likely war crimes.

This, atop existing economic sanctions that experts say have killed tens of thousands of Venezuelans since they were first imposed during the first Trump administration in 2017.

“The efforts so far have put tremendous pressure on Maduro, and the belief is that by late January, Venezuela will be facing an economic calamity unless it agrees to make significant concessions to the US,” the official told Reuters.




The official’s use of the word “quarantine” evoked the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, an existential standoff that occurred after the John F. Kennedy administration imposed a naval blockade around Cuba to prevent Soviet nuclear missiles from being deployed on the island, even as the US was surrounding the Soviet Union with nuclear weapons.

“This is an illegal blockade,” the women-led peace group CodePink said in response to the Reuters report. “Calling it a ‘quarantine’ doesn’t change the reality. The US regime is using hunger as a weapon of war to force regime change in Venezuela. Economic strangulation is warfare and civilians always pay the price. The US is a regime of terror.”

Critics have also compared Trump’s aggression to the George W. Bush administration’s buildup to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, initially referred to as Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL). But unlike Bush, Trump—who derided Bush for not seizing Iraq’s petroleum resources as spoils of war—has openly acknowledged his desire to take Venezuela’s oil.

“Maybe we will sell it, maybe we will keep it,” he Trump said on Monday. “Maybe we’ll use it in the strategic reserves. We’re keeping the ships also.”

On Wednesday, a panel of United Nations experts said that the US blockade and boat strikes constitute “illegal armed aggression” against Venezuela.

Multiple efforts by US lawmakers—mostly Democrats, but also a handful of anti-war Republicans—to pass a war powers resolution blocking the Trump administration from bombing boats or attacking Venezuela have failed.

The blockade and vessel seizures have paralyzed Venezuela’s oil exports. Ports are clogged with full tankers whose operators are fearful of entering international waters. Venezuela-bound tankers have also turned back for fear of seizure. Although Venezuelan military vessels are accompanying tankers, the escorts stop once the ships reach international waters.

According to the New York Times, Venezuela is considering putting armed troops aboard tankers bound for China, which, along with Russia, has pledged its support—but little more—for Caracas.

Trump Isn’t Planning to Invade Venezuela. He’s Planning Something Worse

Rather than launching a military invasion that would provoke public backlash and congressional scrutiny, Trump is doubling down on something more insidious.

A vendor counts Venezuelan bolivar banknotes at La Hoyada market in Caracas on December 23, 2025.
(Photo by Federico Parra/AFP via Getty Images)

Michelle Ellner
Dec 25, 2025

Common Dreams

The loudest question in Washington right now is whether Donald Trump is going to invade Venezuela. The quieter, and far more dangerous, reality is this: he probably won’t. Not because he cares about Venezuelan lives, but because he has found a strategy that is cheaper, less politically risky at home, and infinitely more devastating: economic warfare.

Venezuela has already survived years of economic warfare. Despite two decades of sweeping US sanctions designed to strangle its economy, the country has found ways to adapt: oil has moved through alternative markets; communities have developed survival strategies; people have endured shortages and hardship with creativity and resilience. This endurance is precisely what the Trump administration is trying to break.

Rather than launching a military invasion that would provoke public backlash and congressional scrutiny, Trump is doubling down on something more insidious: total economic asphyxiation. By tightening restrictions on Venezuelan oil exports, its primary source of revenue, Trump’s administration is deliberately pushing the country toward a full-scale humanitarian collapse.

In recent months, US actions in the Caribbean Sea, including the harassment and interdiction of oil tankers linked to Venezuela, signal a shift from financial pressure to illegal maritime force. These operations have increasingly targeted Venezuela’s ability to move its own resources through international waters. Oil tankers have been delayed, seized, threatened with secondary sanctions, or forced to reroute under coercion. The objective is strangulation.

This is illegal under international law.

The freedom of navigation on the high seas is a cornerstone of international maritime law, enshrined in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Unilateral interdiction of civilian commercial vessels, absent a UN Security Council mandate, violates the principle of sovereign equality and non-intervention. The extraterritorial enforcement of US sanctions, punishing third countries and private actors for engaging in lawful trade with Venezuela, has no legal basis. It is coercion, plain and simple. More importantly, the intent is collective punishment.

Trump’s calculation is brutally simple: make Venezuelans so miserable that they will rise up and overthrow Maduro.

By preventing Venezuela from exporting oil, which is the revenue that funds food imports, medicine, electricity, and public services, the Trump administration is knowingly engineering conditions of mass deprivation. Under international humanitarian law, collective punishment is prohibited precisely because it targets civilians as a means to achieve political ends. And if this continues, we will see horrific images: empty shelves, malnourished children, overwhelmed hospitals, people scavenging for food. Scenes that echo those coming out of Gaza, where siege and starvation have been normalized as weapons of war.

US actions will undoubtedly cause millions of Venezuelans to flee the country, likely seeking to travel to the United States, which they are told is safe for their families, full of economic opportunities, and security. . But Trump is sealing the US border, cutting off asylum pathways, and criminalizing migration. When people are starved, when economies are crushed, when daily life becomes unlivable, people move. Blocking Venezuelans from entering the United States while systematically destroying the conditions that allow them to survive at home means that neighboring countries like Colombia, Brazil, and Chile will be asked to absorb the human cost of Washington’s decisions. This is how empire outsources the damage. But these countries have their own economic woes, and mass displacement of Venezuelans will destabilize the entire region.

Venezuela is a test case. What is being refined now—economic siege without formal war, maritime coercion without declared blockade, starvation without bombs—is a blueprint. Any country that refuses compliance with Washington’s political and economic demands should be paying attention. This will be the map for 21st century regime change.

And this is how Trump can reassure the United States Congress that he is not “going to war” with Venezuela. He doesn’t need to. Economic strangulation carries none of the immediate political costs of a military intervention, even as it inflicts slow, widespread devastation. There are no body bags returning to US soil, no draft, no televised bombing campaigns. Just a steady erosion of life elsewhere.

Trump’s calculation is brutally simple: make Venezuelans so miserable that they will rise up and overthrow Maduro. That has been the same calculation behind US policy toward Cuba for six decades—and it has failed. Economic strangulation doesn’t bring democracy; it brings suffering. And even if, by some grim chance, it did succeed in toppling the government, the likely result would not be freedom but chaos—possibly a protracted civil war that could devastate the country, and the region, for decades.

Tomorrow, people in Venezuela will celebrate Christmas. Families will gather around the table to eat hallacas wrapped with care, slices of pan de jamón, and dulce de lechoza. They will share stories, dance to gaitas, and make a toast with Ponche Crema.

If we oppose war because it kills, we must also oppose sanctions that do the same, more quietly, more slowly, and with far less accountability.

But if this economic siege continues, if Venezuelan oil is fully cut off, if the country is denied the means to feed itself, if hunger is allowed to finish what bombs are no longer politically useful to accomplish, then this Christmas may be remembered as one of the last Venezuelans were able to celebrate in anything resembling normal life, at least in the near future.

Polls consistently show that nearly 70 percent of people in the United States oppose a military intervention in Venezuela. War is recognized for what it is: violent, destructive, unacceptable. But sanctions are treated differently. Many people believe they are a harmless alternative, a way to apply “pressure” without bloodshed.

That assumption is dangerously wrong. According to a comprehensive study in medical journal The Lancet, sanctions increase mortality at levels comparable to armed conflict, hitting children and the elderly first. Sanctions do not avoid civilian harm—they systematically produce it.

If we oppose war because it kills, we must also oppose sanctions that do the same, more quietly, more slowly, and with far less accountability. If we don’t act against economic warfare with the same urgency we reserve for bombs and invasions, then sanctions will remain the preferred weapon: politically convenient but equally deadly.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Michelle Ellner
Michelle Ellner is a Latin America campaign coordinator of CODEPINK. She was born in Venezuela and holds a bachelor’s degree in languages and international affairs from the University La Sorbonne Paris IV, in Paris. After graduating, she worked for an international scholarship program out of offices in Caracas and Paris and was sent to Haiti, Cuba, The Gambia, and other countries for the purpose of evaluating and selecting applicants.
Full Bio >

ALL CAPITALI$M IS STATE CAPITALI$M

Canadian Government intervenes with $115M to protect Northwest Territories’ mining hub

ByThe Canadian Press
Published: December 18, 2025 

The Ekati Diamond Mine in the Northwest Territories is shown in this undated handout photo. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Handout — Burgundy Diamond Mines Limited, Dave Brosha Photography (Mandatory Credit) (HO)

OTTAWA — The owner of a mine in Northwest Territories will receive a $115 million loan from the federal government to keep operations running as U.S. tariffs depress the global diamond market.

Arctic Canadian Diamond Company Ltd., a subsidiary of Australia’s Burgundy Diamond Mines Ltd., operates the Ekati mine in the Lac de Gras region of Northwest Territories, roughly 300 km northeast of Yellowknife.

Finance Canada says Ekati employs more than 600 workers and hundreds of additional contractors, more than 200 of them Indigenous. The department estimates the diamond sector is responsible for nearly 20 per cent of the territory’s economy.

Ottawa is extending the relief through its large tariff enterprise loan program, a $10-billion fund set up in March to help companies and workers affected by U.S. President Donald Trump’s global trade disruption.

Burgundy announced in July it had laid off employees at its Point Lake open pit mine because the operation wouldn’t be profitable in the tariff-stricken diamond market. Mining has continued at the underground Misery site, Ekati’s main production centre.


In a filing to the Australia Securities Exchange in September, the company said the United States’ 50 per cent tariffs on gem and jewelry imports from India — a hub for diamond refining — have driven down global prices.

The International Diamond Exchange’s price index shows sharp declines in diamond prices since 2022, which many analysts correlate with flagging demand and the rising popularity of lab-grown gems. But Burgundy said the imposition of tariffs has compounded declines over the past year.

“A further drop in rough diamond prices can be directly attributed to the imposition of the U.S. tariffs applicable to the global diamond trade,” Burgundy’s filing read.

“These tariff measures have placed additional downward pressure on rough diamond prices and materially impacted the company’s revenues.”

Burgundy previously asked to have its trading suspended on the Australian exchange until it could secure external financing.

The company said in July it would maintain its Point Lake site to resume mining if market conditions improved.

In a media statement, Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said the loan to Burgundy will offer “stability” and support jobs in the key northern mining industry.

Ottawa made changes to the loan facility in September to open the financing up to a broader range of firms and to require employers to prioritize worker retention.

The federal government gave Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.-based Algoma Steel $400 million via the large enterprise tariff loan facility in September, alongside $100 million from the Ontario government.

That company announced last month it would lay off more than 1,000 employees as part of its transition away from blast furnaces and toward a greener, more efficient process for steelmaking.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 18, 2025.
Craig Lord, The Canadian Press

Feds, Ontario to sign deal reducing regulatory burden on Ring of Fire, other projects

ByThe Canadian Press
Published: December 17, 2025 

A helicopter moves equipment fuel between work sites near the Ring of Fire mineral deposit in the James Bay lowlands of northern Ontario, Friday, Oct. 24, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Christopher Katsarov (Christopher Katsarov)

Ottawa and Ontario are set to finalize a deal Thursday that will reduce the regulatory burden on large projects, including the road to the Ring of Fire, The Canadian Press has learned.

Provincial and federal government sources who are not allowed to speak publicly say Ottawa has agreed to eliminate any duplicative work on its impact assessments on large projects.

A draft agreement posted on the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada’s website says the goal is to work together to implement the “One Project, One Review and One Decision” approach.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford was asked if this would be the final piece of the puzzle in order to begin building the roads to the Ring of Fire next year.

“I believe so,” he said.

Webequie First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation are leading environmental assessments on three roads that would connect the provincial highway system to their communities and mining activities in the mineral-rich Ring of Fire region in northern Ontario.

In a side deal on the Ring of Fire roads, the federal government has committed to completing its impact assessment on the same timeline as the province’s environmental assessment, as both First Nations say they are set to begin building the roads in 2026.

The province has also signed a deal with Aroland First Nation further south at the foot of the roads to the Ring of Fire that will see an old nearby logging road upgraded.

“This is about bringing them prosperity, bringing Ontario prosperity, making sure that we work with the communities up there,” Ford said.

Ontario Indigenous Affairs Minister Greg Rickford called the upcoming deal “good public policy” that will help the First Nations the province has partnered with to build the roads and other badly needed infrastructure in those communities.

“It need not be smothered in regulatory processes that just serve to make the development of this infrastructure and the penultimate goal of bringing the world its critical minerals longer than it should,” he said.

Energy and Mines Minister Stephen Lecce said they need to get on with building.

“I think part of this agreement that (Ford) has landed is really about securing a path to delivering the roads and ultimately delivering prosperity and more self reliance for Canada,” he said.

Prime Minister Mark Carney and Ford will sign the deal at a ceremony in Ottawa on Thursday. Carney’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

The Canadian Press learned about the details during a recent trip to the Ring of Fire region as part of a reporting project supported by the Pulitzer Centre.

Both Webequie and Marten Falls say the roads will help lift the fly-in communities out of poverty, though other nearby First Nations are not on board with the plan.
RELATED STORY: Inside the Ring of Fire: A tale of two First Nations and a road that could change everything

A source in Ford’s office who is not allowed to speak publicly about the yet-to-be-announced deal says the changes will dramatically speed up big projects across the province, including roads, highways and mines.

“This is huge, not just for the Ring of Fire, but for mining in general, and building roads and highways,” the premier’s office source says. “It will be 10 times more transformational than any major project.”

A senior federal government source, who likewise was not authorized to speak publicly about the deal, says it is all about eliminating duplication. The environmental standards will remain stringent and rights and protections will be upheld, the source promises, including for the roads to the Ring of Fire.

The federal government has launched a regional assessment working group to better understand the impacts of development, but the province and Webequie and Marten Falls say it will not affect the road.

The two governments aim to work together on assessments of navigable waters, species at risk and migratory birds, all long in the federal purview.

With these deals in place, the province is no longer expected to use controversial new powers to designate the road to the Ring of Fire a special economic zone. That provision would have allowed the province to suspend provincial and municipal laws with the goal of speeding up construction of a proposed mine in the Ring of Fire.

The area is said to be replete with critical minerals, but many other First Nations are against development in the region — including the roads and the mine they would lead to.

Wyloo, the Australian mining giant, is nearing completion of its feasibility study on two proposed, connected underground mines at its Eagle’s Nest site.

Wyloo and Juno Corp., a Canadian junior mining company formed in 2019, own the vast majority of the more than 40,000 claims staked in the Ring of Fire. Two other companies, Teck Resources (which recently merged with Anglo American) and Canada Chrome Corporation, also hold a significant number of claims.

The companies say they’ve found a wide variety of critical mineral and base metal deposits, including nickel, copper, chromite, titanium, platinum, vanadium, iron and gold. They are used to make all types of batteries, cellphones, stainless steel, semi-conductors, drones, satellites, data centres and computers.

Meanwhile, Ontario has finalized its regulations to allow for the designation of special economic zones, which will come into force on Jan. 1, 2026.

That was a key component in Ontario’s Bill 5 omnibus package that passed into law last spring. The province gave itself the power to suspend any and all provincial and municipal laws in an effort to speed up the construction of large projects, particularly mines.

Ford has mused about using it for his proposed traffic and transit tunnel under Highway 401.

The special economic zone idea sparked outrage among the majority of First Nations in the province, who saw it as a threat to their way of life.

The new regulations give Economic Development Minister Vic Fedeli the power to choose which areas could be deemed a special economic zone, which company or individual can be deemed a trusted proponent and which projects would be part of the designation.

Those decisions will pass through cabinet first.

“Special economic zones will bolster Ontario’s economic advantage by cutting red tape, accelerating approvals and protecting the jobs and industries that keep our province resilient and competitive,” Fedeli said in a statement.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 17, 2025.
Liam Casey, The Canadian Press

MONOPOLY CAPITALI$M

Product Tanker Giant Hafnia Launches Plan for Mega-Merger with Torm

File image courtesy Torm

Published Dec 23, 2025 2:47 PM by The Maritime Executive

World-leading product tanker company Hafnia has purchased a large block of shares in competitor Torm, and has signaled plans to pursue a mega-merger bringing together two leading fleets in the segment. 

In dual statements, the companies said that Hafnia has acquired about 14 percent of Torm's issued share capital from Oaktree Capital Management, drawing on its own working capital and its lines of credit to make the purchase. The share purchase is large enough to give Hafnia consultation rights on the appointment of one representative on Torm's board. The closing conditions required the approval of regulators in Denmark and Brazil, and all conditions were satisfied before the purchase announcement, Hafnia said. 

Hafnia says that it "believes consolidation is positive for the tanker industry generally and for the shareholders" of both companies, and it is looking at options for a combination of the two businesses. It plans on discussing possibilities for a merger with Torm's board. 

Hafnia is the largest global operator of chemical and product tankers, and it moves crude and various products for blue chip oil majors. The energy shipping conglomerate BW Group holds a 44 percent controlling interest in Hafnia, along with BW's separate divisions for LNG, LPG, specialty gas, dry cargo, offshore wind and FPSO solutions. 

Takeover Offers Prompt Debate Over ZIM's National Security Role

File image courtesy ZIM / Seaspan

Published Dec 23, 2025 11:14 PM by The Maritime Executive

 

Shares in Israeli container line ZIM soared in value on Tuesday after the company's board said that it is evaluating a possible private buyout. At least one offer has already been declined, but two foreign offers are still under consideration, according to Israeli media. 

The buyout competition started last month with an offer from the firm's sitting CEO, Eli Glickman, who proposed to take ZIM private in cooperation with Israeli businessman Rami Unger. ZIM's boardmembers solicited competing offers in order to maximize shareholder value. On Monday, they said that they had decided to reject Glickman's proposal, claiming that the CEO's buyout bid undervalued the company. Glickman remains at the helm of the firm.

Rumored names of other competing bidders have been passed around in the Israeli press. Number-one container carrier MSC is not involved, despite a public mention, the firm told multiple shipping outlets. The two other alternatives named in the Israeli press are Hapag-Lloyd and Maersk. 

If one of the proposals is accepted, ZIM would be a unique candidate for a transnational merger, as it has a dual-purpose role. It is a commercial shipping company, but has a longstanding national-defense commitment: it was launched in 1945 in order to transport personnel and supplies to the region that would soon become formally known as Israel, and its logistical capabilities assisted before and after the creation of the Israeli state in 1948. Today, the Israeli government still holds a "golden share" in ZIM to secure national interests in military logistics and global market access. At the outset of the conflict in Gaza, ZIM offered up the entirety of its fleet for the Israeli government's use in order to facilitate imports of munitions and defense cargoes, and it helped keep the Israeli military supplied throughout the operation. 

The workers' committee at ZIM told Israeli business outlet Calcalist that the line's employees will go out on strike in protest if the board tries to sell the storied firm to a foreign buyer. Union leaders are lobbying Israeli ministers to exercise the state "golden share" if needed in order to block any potential foreign sale.  

"Our struggle is not only against the German Hapag-Lloyd, but against any other foreign company. We will do everything we can to ensure that Zim does not pass into foreign hands, but remains Israeli," committee chairman Oren Caspi told Calcalist. 

The leadership of Israel's National Emergency Authority (NEA) also opposes the idea of a foreign sale, according to local logistics outlet Port2Port. The outlet reports that NEA favors action to "keep the control over the company in Israeli hands" and ensure the "continuity of state function." NEA chief Eitan Yitzhak has circulated a memo to this effect among senior Israeli government ministers, Port2Port reports.

TRUMPIAN STATE CAPITALI$M

US development-finance agency targets AI, minerals in expansion

Bloomberg News | December 18, 2025 | 

Stock image.

A US development-finance agency that’s on track for a tripling in funding aims to invest in data centers for artificial intelligence, as well as critical minerals and energy, according to a top official.

The US International Development Finance Corp. will focus on projects in Latin America, as well as wealthy nations like Canada and Australia that had been outside its remit, Conor Coleman, the DFC’s head of investments and chief of staff, said in an interview.

“You’re going to see us moving at a much faster pace heading into the new year,” Coleman said.

Created under the first Trump administration, the DFC has emerged in his second term as a key tool in his push to harness US economic and business interests in foreign policy. The DFC’s financing capacity will be increased to $205 billion from $60 billion and the roster of countries where it can operate will be expanded under a bill Trump is scheduled to sign later Thursday.

Trump named Ben Black, the son of billionaire Leon Black, to head the DFC.

“America’s foreign investments must deliver for the American people and bolster our position as the global leader of peace and prosperity,” Black said at an event Wednesday.

Coleman said AI data centers are of “massive importance” to the agency, citing a “digital Silk Road” to combat foreign adversaries.

He said a key priority for the DFC’s expanded efforts will be critical minerals, especially in mid-stream processing projects in countries like Canada and Australia.

“That is where I think immediately you’re going to start seeing us play when it comes to high-income country investments,” Coleman said. The DFC announced a $5 billion critical minerals consortium in October.

“We’re using our debt and equity tools to invest in companies overall in the extraction and the processing phase, with the goal of making sure we have the capacity for US and US-aligned parties on the processing side, and then on the extraction side, actually having controls on where the offtake is going for our investments,” he said.

Critical minerals, energy and infrastructure also will be key sectors as the DFC begins work in Ukraine next year, according to Coleman.

The Washington-based agency intends to open a New York City office early next year as it seeks to recruit more Wall Street talent and broadening its financing options, he said.

“The idea of taking more risk, being more flexible capital providers, instead of just traditional, senior, secured project finance lenders, and playing in the mezzanine or the structured equity or the common equity, is really going to open us up to mobilize more private capital,” Coleman said.

“We should be seeing two, three, four times of private sector dollars coming into our investments alongside of us,” he said.

(By Daniel Flatley and Joe Deaux)

AMERIKAN STATE CAPITALI$M 

U.S. Army Looks to Build Small Refineries for Critical Minerals

By Tsvetana Paraskova - Dec 09, 2025

he U.S. Army will develop small-scale refineries to ensure domestic supply of critical minerals for defense and military purposes as the United States and the Western allies look to reduce their dependence on China.

“We ?need to come up with a way to ‌make our own (critical minerals) domestically that we can actually monitor and control within our borders,” Mark Mezger, a munitions procurement adviser for the U.S. Army, told Reuters.

The Army is currently developing a project with the Idaho National Laboratory and gold mining company Perpetua Resources to process antimony.

In September, the U.S. Army’s Joint Program Executive Office Armaments and Ammunition (JPEO A&A) joined Perpetua Resources Inc. to launch the Stibnite Gold Project in central Idaho. The project seeks to redevelop an abandoned mine site in Stibnite for gold and antimony sulfide, a critical component used in ammunition production. The U.S. previously obtained antimony sulfide from foreign sources until 2021 when that supply ended.
“The Stibnite project currently holds the largest identified reserve of antimony in the U.S. At an estimated 148 million lbs., it is one of the largest antimony reserves outside of foreign control,” said Maj. Gen. John T. Reim, Joint Program Executive Officer Armaments & Ammunition and Picatinny Arsenal Commanding General.

The project is “in keeping with the Army’s ongoing ‘Ground-to-Round’ assured munitions strategy to locate and engage with domestic sources for critical materials as we modernize and fortify the Arsenal of Democracy,” Reim added.

The Trump Administration is ensuring funding through buying minority stakes in North American rare earth and lithium companies and projects, while companies in the U.S. and Europe are setting up alliances with miners and refiners to have magnet supply chains outside and independent of China.

The global rare earth supply chain is among the most highly concentrated across all stages of the value chain, analysts at the International Energy Agency (IEA) wrote in a commentary in October.

By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com

US plans more stakes in minerals companies, Trump official says

Bloomberg News | December 4, 2025 | 

Jarrod Agen. Credit: Center for Strategic and International Studies

The US government plans to take more equity stakes in critical minerals companies, a White House official said Thursday, calling the once-rare move necessary to counter China’s dominance in the raw materials used in everything from semiconductors to MRI machines.

“I think they’re the norm from our perspective,” said Jarrod Agen, executive director of the National Energy Dominance Council, speaking at a forum in Washington. “There is a broad scope of different companies who are coming to us. They’re making the right case.”

Critical minerals such as gallium and cobalt are used in products ranging from iPhones to industrial magnets. They’re also vital for defense systems including missile guidance, radar and jet engines, as well as batteries and other technologies needed to cut carbon pollution. Over the past year, the Trump administration has spent over $1 billion to take stakes in critical minerals and mining companies, often sending the company’s stock prices soaring.

Among the deals are $400 million in exchange for a 15% stake in MP Materials Corp., which was announced in July, $670 million in exchange for a stake in magnet producer Vulcan Elements Inc., and $35.6 million for a 10% stake in Canadian minerals explorer Trilogy Metals Inc. The Trump administration announced in September it was acquiring a stake in Lithium Americas Corp., which is developing the largest lithium deposit in the country, as part of a deal to restructure an existing $2.23 billion loan the Canadian company held with the Energy Department.

Agen, in a brief interview, declined to specify what company could be next.

The strategy of investing taxpayer dollars in companies the administration has deemed essential to national security comes as the US’ reliance on China for the crucial materials has become a flash point in the trade war. Beijing responded to US export restrictions by curbing shipments of rare earth elements, a move that briefly disrupted global supplies before China eased the limits after Washington lifted its countermeasures.

“We’re literally buying equity, getting equity in companies to give the backing of the US, because that’s the only way we’re going to catch up with China on these things,” Agen said in his remarks at the American Growth Summit, which was sponsored by companies such as Citigroup Inc. and NVIDIA Corporation. “They know the government is backing us. No one wants to mess with President Trump, and so we can actually get the materials.”

(By Ari Natter)

Serra Verde cuts short China offtake deals, approached by Western firms

Reuters | December 4, 2025 |

Serra Verde is expected to produce 5,000 tonnes per year of rare earth oxide. (Image: Serra Verde)

Brazilian rare earths miner Serra Verde has slashed the contract periods of its Chinese processing deals, opening up the potential to supply Western companies when their separation capacity becomes available in coming years, its CEO said.

The West has been racing to develop alternative sources of rare earths, vital for defence, electronics, electric vehicles and wind turbines, since China controls 90% of processed global supply

When Serra Verde’s mine was being developed, it agreed 10-year offtake deals with Chinese companies to buy its concentrate for processing since no other options were available.

The Serra Verde mine is rich in heavy rare earths, unlike many other Western deposits, but only now are plants gearing up in the West to process them.

Serra Verde makes global list of critical projects

“In a couple of years we’ll have some options to separate the heavies outside of China,” CEO Thras Moraitis told Reuters.

Privately-held Serra Verde renegotiated the Chinese deals and now they conclude at the end of next year, giving the company multiple options to diversify its customer base, Moraitis said.

“The Chinese, the Americans, the Japanese, the Europeans, the Canadians all have approached us, given that we are the only supplier of heavy rare earths, at least for the foreseeable future.”

Forecast shortages of heavy rare earths dysprosium and terbium could be a stumbling block in the West’s drive to create domestic supply chains of rare earths and permanent magnets.

Price floor essential

Moraitis, formerly an executive of Xstrata, which was acquired by commodity group Glencore, said a price floor guaranteed by governments was key for the development of the rare earths sector outside of China.

The US provided a guaranteed minimum price to rare earths group MP Materials in July as part of a multibillion-dollar investment by the Pentagon and sources told Reuters the mechanism would likely be extended to other firms

Group of Seven members and the European Union are also considering price floors to promote rare earth production.

Serra Verde’s Brazilian mine is an ionic clay mine deposit. The standard extraction technique for such deposits in China and Myanmar has involved flushing the deposit with chemicals, which has caused contamination of water supplies and deforestation.

Serra Verde has spent several hundred million dollars building a plant that does not discharge toxic waste.

The company launched commercial production in early 2024, but has been optimizing output so it has not yet hit full output, which is expected to be about 6,500 metric tons of total rare earth oxides a year by 2027.

The US Development Finance Corporation approved a $465 million loan earlier this year.

Serra Verde is owned by private equity groups Denham Capital, Energy and Minerals Group and Vision Blue, which is led by the former head of Xstrata, Mick Davis.

(By Eric Onstad; Editing by Mark Potter)

US vows over $1 billion for Congo critical minerals supply chain

Bloomberg News | December 5, 2025 |

President Trump joins President Kagame of Rwanda and President Tshisekedi of the Democratic Republic of the Congo as they sign the Washington Accords. Credit: The White House | X

The US is in talks to provide more than $1 billion for two critical minerals and railway projects in central Africa as it seeks to secure supplies deemed crucial for national security.

The US International Development Finance Corp. plans to support a new copper and cobalt venture between the Democratic Republic of Congo’s Gecamines SA and Mercuria Energy Trading, as well as a rail project linking Congo and other central and southern African nations to Angola’s coast. 

“These projects will help to secure vital supply chains, expand private sector opportunity, and strengthen America’s global competitiveness, while supporting peace, prosperity, and dignity in central Africa,” DFC chief executive officer Ben Black said in a statement.

President Donald Trump has made securing minerals that are crucial for military and high-tech applications one of his priorities, with several deals with African countries emerging. Chinese companies dominate the mining and processing of many of these metals, and Washington is looking to loosen the Asian powerhouse’s stranglehold over the trade.

The DFC announcement follows the signature on Thursday of a strategic infrastructure and minerals partnership between Congo and the US.

Congo is rich in multiple critical minerals including copper, cobalt, lithium, tantalum and manganese.

Switzerland’s Mercuria and Gecamines announced their copper and cobalt trading tie-up on Friday.

“The partnership would grant US end users a right of first refusal, providing US industries with access to critical minerals essential for economic growth and competitiveness,” Gecamines said about the possible DFC investment in an emailed statement.

Under the US-Congo strategic partnership, Congo has committed to shipping more of its minerals west toward the Atlantic Ocean over Angola’s Lobito railway corridor. Currently most of Congo’s exports move south or east along the road or railway.

The DFC is proposing up to $1 billion in financing to Portugal’s Mota Engil SGPS for “the rehabilitation, operation, and transfer of the Dilolo–Sakania railway line” in Congo, which would connect to the Lobito corridor.

(By Michael J. Kavanagh)

US, Congo eye minerals pact amid peace deal with Rwanda

Bloomberg News | December 3, 2025 |

Congolese soldiers. Stock image.

The Democratic Republic of Congo aims to sign a minerals and infrastructure partnership with the Trump administration on Thursday as part of a series of deals targeted at ending a long-running conflict in the eastern part of the resource-rich African nation.

President Donald Trump is scheduled to meet with the presidents of Congo and Rwanda in Washington on Thursday to oversee the signature of a peace accord between the two countries.

The three-decade-long conflict is one of several that Trump has claimed to end as part of his global dealmaking, despite ongoing fighting between the Congolese army and Rwanda-backed fighters.

The central African nations will also sign an economic agreement, while the US and the Congo are expected to ink their own partnership.

Through the deal with the US, “the DRC will become a continental energy hub, a kind of logistical, strategic hub, but also an indispensable player in the critical mineral supply chains,” Tina Salama, a spokesperson for Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi, told reporters in Washington on Wednesday.

The US has been targeting Congo’s minerals to secure key inputs for technology, energy and defense and as a way of diminishing China’s dominance over the trade.

Congo is the biggest nation by landmass in sub-Saharan Africa and rich in strategic metals including cobalt, copper, tantalum, lithium and gold.

The deal with the US will support local mineral production and job creation, and offer US companies the chance to invest in resource, energy and infrastructure projects, Salama said.

This will include the development of a $1.8 billion connection to Angola’s Lobito railway corridor to the Atlantic Ocean and the Grand Inga dam, which would be the biggest hydropower plant in the world, she said.

But the investments will only move forward if Rwanda stops supporting rebel groups in Congo’s east, Salama said.

Rwanda-backed M23 rebels have occupied the region’s two biggest cities since early this year. In recent days, M23 has clashed with the Congolese army in South Kivu province.

“It’s a proof that Rwanda doesn’t want peace,” Congolese government spokesman Patrick Muyaya said alongside Salama in Washington. “Peace for us means withdrawal of Rwandan troops.”

Rwanda denies supporting the M23 and says its troops have only been taking “defensive measures” to secure its borders, in particular against a rebel group with ties to the perpetrators of the 1994 Rwandan genocide against Tutsis.

Congo has agreed to “neutralize” the group, known as the FDLR, as part of the US-backed peace agreement.

“It’s up to the DRC to show how much and how quickly they want peace,” Rwandan government spokesperson Yolande Makolo told Bloomberg Wednesday.

“Achieving peace is tied to the DRC ending all state support to the FDLR as well as other forces hostile to Rwanda, which will allow us to relax our defensive measures, but this hasn’t happened yet,” she said.

(By Michael J. Kavanagh

 

US minerals projects seek ‘industrial vision’ from Washington to compete with China

Reuters | December 4, 2025 \

Image: Perpetua Resources

Washington must move even faster to bolster critical minerals projects and offset Beijing’s grip on the world’s supply of the building blocks for electronics, weapons and a range of other goods, three US mining and refining executives said on Thursday.

The push underscores how Washington’s surging support this year for the sector – including taking stakes in mining companies and guaranteeing a price floor for the only US rare earths mine – is falling short of what industry leaders say is needed amid intense Chinese competition.

Executives from Perpetua Resources, American Rare Earths and Westwin Elements told the Reuters NEXT conference in New York that the US government should release a comprehensive minerals plan, pressure Indonesia to trim nickel production, and speed up the time for the US Export-Import Bank and other agencies to approve loan funding, among other steps.

“We need an industrial vision,” said Melissa Sanderson, a director at American Rare Earths, which is working to build a rare earths mine in Wyoming.

“What we need is an integrated plan for building the critical minerals supply chain with all of the myriad inputs, antimony, nickel, copper, rare earths and how that flows through to the battery makers, to the magnet manufacturers, to the various end-users.”

KaLeigh Long, CEO of privately held Westwin, which is building the only US nickel refinery, is asking the Trump administration to pressure Indonesia to limit its nickel output, which has surged in the past two years to roughly 60% of global supply and dragged down nickel prices nearly 50% as a result.

That forced BHP and others to shutter their operations and has posed a challenge for Westwin as it aims to secure financing to refine 34,000 metric tons of nickel per year in Oklahoma by 2030.

“I’m really urging the US government to think simple,” Long said. “In terms of nickel, let’s get a quota on Indonesian production. You do that, and I can almost promise you that overnight you will see a cure in the nickel price.”

Long said a price floor for nickel from Washington would be impractical given the large size of the market for that metal and pushed for limits on Indonesia’s output instead.

“A price floor is kind of a waste of our energy right now,” she said. “I don’t see that being a stable solution or a near-term solution.”

Rare earths, though, are a much smaller market than nickel and price supports are key until there is more transparent pricing, said Sanderson, a former US diplomat and executive at copper miner Freeport-McMoRan.

The London Metal Exchange, for example, trades nickel but not rare earths, a market that China also dominates.

“The LME has shown no interest so far in trying to develop a rare earths market and part of that is because it’s currently a narrow spectrum of an already narrow market,” Sanderson said. “It would be helpful if LME were to develop a pricing mechanism for rare earths, but the question becomes, ‘Would China actually honor it?'”

Speed up financing review

Mckinsey Lyon of Perpetua, which is building an antimony and gold mine in Idaho with support from JPMorgan Chase’s $1.5 trillion investment fund for US national security, said Washington’s recent moves reflect a “frantic scramble” to understand what can be a confusing web of federal agencies and programs, each with priorities that sometimes conflict.

“Companies are getting some solutions, but what’s not happening right now is a comprehensive strategy or road map,” said Lyon.

Both Perpetua and Westwin have applied for funding from the US Export-Import Bank (EXIM), which acts as the US government’s export credit agency.

Long said Washington must move faster to approve those loans, which often have terms more attractive than with private lenders and at higher amounts. Perpetua, for instance, has asked for $1.8 billion in government loans.

“EXIM debt could allow us to execute on our commercial expansion, but the underwriting needs to speed up,” Long said. “They just simply need more processability and more people, basically.”

(By Ernest Scheyder and Shariq Khan; Editing by Franklin Paul and Matthew Lewis)