Characterized by an arid and mountainous territory dominated by the Hindu Kush, Afghanistan for over 30 years has not failed to arouse at regular intervals a great interest of a strategic nature not only for the geography that makes it a crossroads between Asia and Europe, but also due to the high presence of minerals in the subsoil.
The first to understand the potential hidden in the Afghan underground were the Soviets engaged in a very complicated invasion that ended with the withdrawal in 1989. However, it was when the CIA came into possession of the dossiers prepared by the Moscow experts, on the occasion of the ousting of the Taliban for hand of the US military in 2001, that the question of the presence of minerals from the Afghan subsoil was again addressed. The mandate to understand how much hidden potential was in the bowels of the country was entrusted in 2006 to the analysts of the US Geological Survey, hastily recalled from Iraq where they were engaged in oil surveys.
After a series of reconnaissance, the experts established that 60 million tons of copper, 2.2 million tons of iron ore, 1.4 million tons of rare earths plus gold lay in what appeared to be an inhospitable and arid territory. , silver, zinc, lithium and mercury. The study produced by US geologists, however, did not have a sequel: the mineral deposited in the subsoil remained there, waiting for a new 'feasibility study' which, with the disorderly withdrawal of the US army, perhaps it will now be up to China to draw up, amid skepticism international.
The fear is in fact that China's grip on materials considered strategic for the ecological transition could become even tighter. On the other hand, it is a fact that both the US and Europe depend 80% and 98% respectively on China for the supply of rare earths, materials without which it would not be possible to produce lithium batteries, wind turbines and solar panels. . However, the problems are more complex. First of all, it should be pointed out that the problem of rare earths arises not so much from their shortage but from the highly polluting process that has pushed the West to outsource the process to China in recent years. The paradox of the 'green' revolution is in fact that public opinion,while firmly in favor of the green transition, it does not look favorably on the mines and foundries needed to implement it. But now that the consumption of electricity from renewable sources is destined to increase conspicuously, the focus of policymakers, including European ones, has returned to focus on the development of the extraction and refining of metals, as demonstrated by the publication of the "Critical Raw Materials Resilience: Charting a Path towards greater Security and Sustainability "in September 2020. It must also be considered that, even if China dominates the electricity supply chain today, it will not reach the same degree of geopolitical influence obtained by Saudi Arabia and from other Middle Eastern countries with oil.Limiting battery shipments could lead to higher prices and delays for new electric cars, but it would have no impact on people's ability to travel in their vehicles today as it did during the austerity of the 1970s.
It is also true, however, that "disconnection from China - highlighted the Center for Strategic and National Studies - is impossible today and in the future it will be unlikely as well as probably costly". In the case of trade relations between the United States and China, in particular, there is a mutual vulnerability that could pave the way for a potential agreement to protect certain materials considered strategic. In fact, if on the one hand the US depends on China for the supply of rare earths, in the semiconductor sector the former have a market share of almost 50% worldwide.