US Turns to Soft-Law diplomacy in Critical Minerals Push, Raising Concerns Over Transparency and Global Equity
WASHINGTON D.C. – The United States is rapidly forging agreements centered on critical minerals through soft-law instruments - Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) and similar arrangements – bypassing conventional treaty processes to secure supply chains amidst escalating geopolitical competition. These deals, focused on practical steps like information exchange and financing, are enabling swift action but are simultaneously prompting scrutiny regarding transparency, constitutional legitimacy, and potential imbalances in the global economic order.
The shift towards these bilateral, non-binding agreements allows the US to quickly establish partnerships, particularly with countries like Thailand, to bolster access to essential minerals. Though, legal scholars note this approach raises questions about accountability, as it circumvents domestic treaty-making procedures.
This strategy also contributes to a pattern of “serial bilateralism,” where numerous individual negotiations can lead to systemic changes while favoring larger economies in one-on-one discussions. Coupled with ”network effects” stemming from a proliferation of similar deals, this dynamic risks solidifying the dominance of powerful nations.
While these soft-law instruments emphasize cooperation, they coexist with existing binding treaties, allowing larger economies to maintain their legal entitlements.Such as, the US-Thailand MoU acknowledges the importance of domestic value addition in Thailand, but the country remains vulnerable to legal challenges under existing trade agreements if it implements industrial policies deemed trade-restrictive. This interplay, experts warn, could reinforce existing disparities between the “periphery” and the “core” of the global economic system.
The ultimate success of these deals hinges on their practical implementation – including the specifics of price mechanisms – and their impact on restructuring critical mineral supply chains. A key concern remains the potential consequences for low and middle-income countries navigating the intensifying rivalry between global powers.
