Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s upcoming visit to Washington, where he is expected to sign a high-profile deal on critical minerals, has reignited discussions about global supply chains and strategic resources related to these minerals. This move assumes that Ukraine can serve as a key supplier to Western economies, reducing dependence on China and meeting the demand for minerals essential to defense technologies and green energy transitions.
However, recent reports suggest that Ukraine’s critical mineral reserves may not be commercially viable at scale. Moreover, many of these resources are located in Russian-occupied territory, making them inaccessible to Ukraine or, via Ukraine, the United States. This raises a pressing question: If Ukraine cannot supply these resources as envisioned, who can?
The most obvious answer is Canada. With vast reserves of critical minerals, political stability, and geographical proximity to the United States, Canada is uniquely positioned to strengthen North America’s supply chain resilience. If properly developed, Canada’s resources could help counter China’s dominance in global critical mineral markets, a dominance that carries significant security implications. The issue of critical minerals is not merely economic—it is fundamentally about geopolitics, national defense, and the dynamics of great power competition.
China has long recognized the strategic value of critical minerals, developing a near-monopoly over their processing and leveraging this dominance for geopolitical influence. The United States imports approximately 80% of its rare earth elements from China, leaving it vulnerable to supply disruptions.
This reliance has prompted policy responses, including Executive Order 13817, issued by President Donald Trump in 2017, which declared a national emergency over foreign-controlled critical mineral supply chains and emphasized the need for secure domestic sources.
Canada’s rich deposits of cobalt, nickel, lithium, graphite, copper, potash, niobium, and rare earth elements such as neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium, and terbium position it as a natural partner in securing North America’s defense industrial base. These minerals are indispensable for advanced military systems, semiconductors, and electric vehicle batteries. Neodymium, for instance, is crucial for manufacturing high-performance magnets used in missile guidance systems. By tapping into Canada’s resources, the United States can mitigate its dependence on China and ensure a stable supply of strategically vital materials.
While Canada is well-endowed with critical minerals, its ability to capitalize on this advantage is uncertain. Ottawa’s track record on resource development and defense procurement is marred by delays, inefficiencies, and regulatory hurdles. To fully realize the potential of its mineral wealth, Canada must invest in extraction and processing capabilities, cultivate technological expertise, and streamline regulatory frameworks. The key question is whether Ottawa can overcome these barriers and become a reliable partner in strengthening North America’s defense supply chain.
Geographically, Canada holds a significant advantage. Its vast territories contain some of the world’s most substantial untapped mineral deposits. Quebec’s lithium and graphite reserves are essential for electric vehicle production, a sector increasingly tied to defense mobility solutions. Ontario’s Ring of Fire region contains nickel and chromite deposits critical for battery storage and stainless steel production used in military hardware. The Northwest Territories boast considerable cobalt and rare earth element reserves, while Newfoundland and Labrador offer promising copper deposits. Developing these resources would enhance the strategic autonomy of North America and reduce vulnerability to supply chain disruptions orchestrated by adversarial powers.
However, Canada’s track record raises concerns about its ability to build such a fully integrated supply chain. Ottawa’s defense procurement processes have historically been plagued by delays and inefficiencies, casting doubt on its capacity to develop the necessary infrastructure for extracting and processing critical minerals.
The key question for Canada, then, is can Ottawa do what is necessary to enable Canada to become the cornerstone of an integrated and reliable North American critical mineral supply chain?
China has spent decades refining its strategy, acquiring mineral-rich assets abroad while consolidating control over global refining and processing capabilities. Even when raw materials are sourced from outside China, they are often sent there for refining before being used in Western industries.
This control enables Beijing to weaponize supply chains, restricting exports of critical minerals as leverage in geopolitical disputes. Western military planners recognize that dependence on Chinese-controlled supply chains for essential defense materials is a major vulnerability. A disruption in China’s rare earth exports, whether due to geopolitical tensions, economic coercion, or internal policy shifts, could paralyze industries crucial to national security.
This is why aligning Canada’s critical minerals strategy with U.S. policy is so necessary. Trump’s Executive Order 13817 both highlighted the risks posed by dependence on adversarial nations and laid the groundwork for an American strategy intended to minimize that dependence.
As a neighboring ally with abundant resources, Canada is well-positioned to integrate within this framework. However, strategic alignment alone does not guarantee effective action. Canada must demonstrate that it is able to deliver the goods – both in the sense of extracting, processing and delivering the critical minerals, and in the sense of being a dependable partner in the North American defense industrial base.
And this is key. The implications of developing Canada’s critical mineral resources extend beyond mere economics; they are fundamentally tied to national security and global power dynamics. Canada has a critical role to play in strengthening North American and Western security by ensuring a stable and reliable supply of critical minerals.
By leading in this sector, Canada can bolster defense readiness, support allied industrial bases, and reinforce the resilience of Western economies against coercive economic tactics by adversarial nations.
President Zelensky’s visit may generate headlines, but it underscores a critical gap rather than resolves it. Ukraine’s critical mineral deposits are limited and commercially unviable at scale; Canada’s are quite the opposite. The question therefore is no longer whether Canada should step into this role, but whether it will. The resources exist, the geopolitical rationale is clear, and the stakes are growing. All that is needed now is decisive action on Ottawa’s part.
President of the United States Donald Trump speaking at the 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland. Image Credit: Gage Skidmore.
If Canada fails to act decisively, others will fill the void. The U.S. is actively seeking alternative suppliers, and if Canada cannot meet expectations, Washington will look elsewhere – perhaps to Australia, Greenland, or emerging players in the critical minerals market. The window for leadership in this space is rapidly closing.
The consequences of inaction extend beyond lost economic opportunities; they threaten the broader security architecture that underpins the Western alliance – and even Canada’s historical relationship with its southern neighbor. Canada must decide: will it become a cornerstone of the North American critical minerals supply chain, or will it or be relegated to irrelevance? The time for Ottawa to choose is now.
About the Author: Dr. Andrew Latham
Andrew Latham is a non-resident fellow at Defense Priorities and a professor of international relations and political theory at Macalester College in Saint Paul, MN. Andrew is now a Contributing Editor to 19FortyFive, where he writes a daily column. You can follow him on X: @aakatham.
