Rare Earth Metals: From America's dominance to Chinese hegemony

The recent discovery of rare earth metals in Japanese deep sea proves that rare earth metals are not that rare as their name signifies.

Today’s modern life is impossible without rare earth metals. Rare earth metals are 17 elements including 15 separately presented lanthanides as well as scandium, and yttrium.

These metals are used in manufacturing batteries, vehicles, LCDs, plasma screens, fiber optics, medical imaging, hybrid vehicles, wind turbines, microphones, speakers and other green technology devices. This group of metals is indispensable for high performance optics and lasers and key to the most powerful magnets and superconductors in the world.

Their various applications have given rise to western powers’ fear of Chinese dominance in high technology. China currently has near monopoly in Rare earth metals supply.

  "The Middle East has oil; we have rare earths ... it is of extremely important strategic significance; we must be sure to handle the rare earth issue properly and make the fullest use of our country's advantage in rare earth resources." Deng Xiaoping, a Chinese politician from the late 1970s to the late 1980s.

China is rapidly reducing export quota of rare earth in order to strategically move Chinese manufacturers up the supply chain so that they may sell valuable finished goods to the world rather than lowly raw material.

This presented America with a challenge in keeping its dominant position in high tech but also its hegemony over developed nation, who are in dying need of the elements.

The significance of the metals can be gauged from the fact that many geopolitical experts consider these metals to be the sole reason of U.S. stay in Afghanistan. United States, according to them, wants to make European powers their ally, against China, by controlling the supply of Afghanistan’s rare earth metals.

In 2010, Pentagon estimated Afghanistan’s mineral deposits to be worth 1 trillion $, once mined. The New York Times reported that White House officials are looking at Afghanistan’s mineral resources as compelling reason to extend their stay in the country.

“We live in a different world than the past, where commodity prices mattered because a monopoly allowed sometimes a single nation or a group of nations to charge an extremely high price for that material, and people are still thinking along those lines,” Michael Silver said. “That’s not the world we live in today, particularly with rare-earth metals, which is kind of what got me involved in the Afghanistan situation.” Michael Silver head White House Initiative and CEO of American Element

Critics on the other hand points to the fact that Afghanistan is a war zone moreover; mining and refining these metals from the mountain is costly. Another factor which goes against America is Afghanistan has no coast of its own and the only cost effective route for the metals is through Pakistan’s pushtun belt.

Foreign investment in Pakistan: boon or bane?

In the last couple of days, Pakistan has witnessed an increase in foreign investment. Many local companies were acquired by foreign multinationals. Dawlance, Pakistan’s white goods manufacturer was acquired by Turkish group Arçelik . Furthermore, in the same week a Dutch based dairy cooperative FrieslandCampina acquired stakes in Engro for around $460 million.

This shows that international investors are viewing Pakistan as a growing market. Its huge population provides huge consumer base. The rise in middle class along with young population makes it attractive location for investment.  Many European countries are having population as much as Pakistan has graduates.

But is there any benefit to the nation of these huge investments from multinationals. In a nutshell we would say yes. But on a deep analysis we would say it is hard to say anything precise unless we take into account other factors.

Let us assume that Turkish group would enhance the quality of the products, manufactured by Dawlance, and would make them attractive to export markets. Definitely, in this case it would be good for Pakistan. Multinational companies have huge research and development departments with billions of dollars in budget which helps them in developing new and better products. Small companies like local ones cannot expend that much on research and development. Furthermore, small companies have issues with protecting patent rights. Hence, from this particular angle it is good that foreign companies are making inroads into Pakistani market.

With better quality and increased foreign clients’ satisfaction, country would be able to earn foreign exchange. This would also help Pakistan to move from exporter of low-tech to exporter of high-tech products.

The ability of multinationals to get a better deal from Govt. in matters of tax rebates is another thing to ponder. In countries like Pakistan, Govt. rules are more favorable to foreign big investors rather than local small investors. The exemption of duties and taxes extended to Chinese companies working on CPEC is one such example.

Exemptions in taxes make it more likely for these companies to earn heavy profits and pay high salaries to its employee. This would mean more and high paying jobs for locals as well as better employee retention for the multinational companies.

But there are more cases in which these companies hire foreign people than local ones. This would mean snatching jobs which could be provided by local companies to local people. Moreover, huge portion of profit earned, through getting tax rebates, by these companies is repatriated back to their country of origin.

Thus foreign investment is good for host country if it leads to transfer of technology; increase in exports, provides employment to local ones, pays taxes and duties to host country Govt. and improves quality of manufactured goods.