How Australia, with Friends, Can Secure Its Place in Critical Minerals

Rather than waiting for market forces to decide the fate of its nickel industry, Australia should have used its 2023 critical minerals strategy to stabilize production. More importantly, countries in the Minerals Security Partnership, particularly the US, should have stepped up and invested in Australia’s mining and processing capabilities. Friend-shoring needs to be more than just rhetoric.

Despite setbacks in nickel, Australia is making progress in rare earths. Lynas Rare Earths is expanding its processing facilities in Kalgoorlie, and Iluka Resources is developing Australia’s first fully integrated rare earths refinery at Eneabba. Federal funding supports these projects.

China controls more than 90 percent of the world’s rare earth refining. It also has used export restrictions and bans as a geopolitical tool.

Australia’s Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive—a 10 percent tax credit for onshore processing—raises serious questions. Since Australia lacks a viable downstream industry, such as refining, alloy production, or manufacturing, these processed materials still go to China. Australian taxpayers are just subsidizing the middle stage of the supply chain, only for China to capture the higher-value downstream benefits. Without a full industrial chain, this policy doesn’t create real resilience in supply; it just makes Australian critical minerals slightly cheaper for China.

Australia’s critical minerals strategy also affects its national security one. Nuclear submarines rely on more than a dozen critical minerals, including rare earths for sonar systems, cobalt for high-performance batteries and titanium for hull construction. Other advanced defense systems depend on stable critical mineral supplies.

Securing these materials requires a coordinated approach. The US, through the Defense Production Act, can prioritize domestic mining, refining and processing of key materials for defense and high-tech industries, reducing reliance on imports from potentially hostile nations. In 2024 Australia was designated as a domestic source for funding, showing the potential for deeper collaboration and greater supply chain resilience.

If the US and Britain see Australia as a long-term defense partner, they should be investing in its critical minerals sector. AUKUS should be a platform for strengthening Australia’s industrial base, including processing and refining critical minerals.

Australia’s approach to critical minerals is guided by a suite of strategic policies and documents that play a role in securing supply chains, strengthening Australia’s industrial base and strategic position, but better alignment is needed.

Closer coordination of critical minerals policy with its defense, industry and trade strategies can revitalize capacity in the industry while helping to diversify mineral supply chains away from China.

Australia can’t afford to take a passive approach. Global supply chains are shifting fast. If Australia wants to be a cornerstone of Western critical mineral security, it must act decisively and demand that its allies do the same.

Vlado Vivoda is an industry fellow at the Sustainable Minerals Institute of the University of Queensland. This article is published courtesy of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).