MWE Correspondent
The United States is rapidly expanding its involvement in Africa’s critical minerals sector, but the growing competition for the continent’s copper, cobalt, lithium, graphite, rare earths and other strategic resources is raising questions over whether African countries will capture enough of the wealth generated from their mineral deposits.
Washington has intensified efforts to secure alternative sources of critical minerals as it seeks to reduce dependence on China, which has established a strong position in mining, processing and refining across several African mineral-producing countries.
The US strategy now combines investment, diplomatic agreements, infrastructure development and partnerships with African governments and private companies. Recent agreements with countries including Nigeria and Kenya have placed mineral exploration, processing and supply chains at the centre of expanding economic relations.
But the growing foreign interest also exposes a long-standing problem for Africa: the continent possesses large quantities of minerals needed for electric vehicles, renewable energy, advanced electronics and defence technologies, yet much of the economic value is still created outside Africa.
Nigeria and Kenya have both stressed the importance of local processing as foreign investors increase their interest in African mineral deposits.
Nigeria signed a framework agreement with the United States on September 24 covering geological data, mineral exploration, mineral development, processing, infrastructure and technical capacity building.
Nigeria’s Solid Minerals Minister Dele Alake said the country could not remain a source of raw materials while other countries captured most of the value. The government wants more local processing, jobs, skills and opportunities for Nigerian businesses.
Kenya has made a similar argument. Its government says minerals such as rare earths, lithium, graphite, copper, nickel and niobium should be processed domestically before export so that more value, technology and skilled employment remain within Africa.
The debate is particularly important because Kenya’s Mrima Hill deposit in Kwale County is believed to contain substantial quantities of rare earth minerals and niobium, attracting interest from international companies.
The United States has offered to support Kenya in developing mineral-processing capacity, while American companies are seeking opportunities to participate in the sector.
Also Read: Tanzania Urges Women Miners To Turn Licences Into Productive Businesses
The growing American presence is closely linked to competition with China.
China has spent decades building mining, processing and infrastructure networks across Africa and currently holds a strong position in several critical-mineral supply chains. Analysts say this dominance has made it difficult for African countries to move higher up the value chain.
Washington is now attempting to create alternative supply chains that reduce dependence on Chinese-controlled processing and refining.
The US strategy includes support for projects and infrastructure such as the Lobito Corridor, which links mineral-producing areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia with Angola’s Atlantic port.
For Washington, such projects can improve access to critical minerals and create supply chains less dependent on China.
For African countries, however, the central question is whether improved access to global markets will translate into African industrialisation or simply make it easier to export more minerals.
Critical minerals are increasingly valuable because they are essential for technologies ranging from electric vehicle batteries and renewable-energy systems to aerospace, electronics and advanced manufacturing.
Yet mining is only one stage of the value chain.
The greatest economic returns can come from processing, refining, manufacturing components and producing finished technologies.
This creates a difficult position for mineral-rich African countries. They can attract billions of dollars in foreign investment into mines while still importing many of the high-value products made from the minerals extracted from their own territories.
Recent analysis of Africa’s critical-minerals sector has highlighted this structural problem, noting that the continent remains relatively low in global mineral value chains despite possessing significant reserves.
The expansion of mining also raises questions about communities, land, environmental protection and the distribution of revenues.
In Kenya, for example, residents have raised concerns over possible effects of proposed mining activities at Mrima Hill on land, water resources, cultural heritage and livelihoods. The concerns are currently part of a legal challenge surrounding the project.
Similar concerns have been raised elsewhere in Africa as governments attempt to accelerate mineral development in response to growing global demand.
Human Rights Watch has also warned that new US-backed investment in the Democratic Republic of Congo should address corruption and human-rights risks while ensuring meaningful consultation with affected communities.
The expanding US interest therefore presents both an investment opportunity and a policy challenge for African governments.
Foreign capital can help finance exploration, infrastructure, technology and processing facilities that many countries would struggle to develop alone. But without strong local-content rules, transparent contracts, taxation systems and domestic processing requirements, a larger mining sector does not automatically guarantee broader industrial development.
Africa’s mineral wealth is now at the centre of an increasingly competitive global race.
The key issue for the continent will be whether African countries can use that competition to build industries, technology and skilled employment at home—or whether the new scramble for critical minerals will simply create another cycle in which Africa exports valuable resources while other countries capture the largest share of the value.
