India’s Rare Earth Crisis: Addressing the Elephant in the House

While rare earth minerals have become essential for future growth, it’s distribution across the world is not even. It becomes more challenging for countries to make a balance when major powers like China holds almost 80% of its share. Naturally, weaponisation of minerals take place and economic statecraft increasingly substitutes direct military confrontations. In this light, middle powers like India and its stakes become higher.

Background

India holds almost 5% of rare earth minerals as per current geographical estimations. 90% of which, mostly light Rare Earth Elements (REE), are found in coastal belts and are monazite driven. The rest, mainly heavy REEs, are potentially lying in Inland and Hard-Rock Rare Earth Zones like Singhbhum (Jharkhand), Bastar (Chhattisgarh), Aravalli (Rajasthan) and so forth. Yet these elements are unexplored due to various reasons like the existence of the Red Corridors and Naxalite movements, cumulated resistance of tribal populations and amongst others. Now, due to security and other imperatives when the governments in power -whether at the state or at the centre -tries to catch that up, the issue overflows into becoming a socio-political one.

Social Narratives v/s Security Imperatives- The Recent case of Aravalli

Unlike India’s coastal monazite sands (light REEs), Aravalli-type hard rock systems are strategically important for heavy REEs. These Heavy REEs are critical for EV motors, wind turbines, missiles, and aerospace alloys. Although China dominates the global HREE supply, Aravalli could reduce the strategic dependence in the longer run. But, the legal framework here has traditionally prioritised ecological protection. And when, the recent Supreme Court judgement allowed mining below 100 meters belt, social narratives were created to play with the emotions of the people in order to mobilise the masses by the opposition parties and their social branches. In my opinion, here lies the need of understanding two technical things. First, We the people of India, have chosen Democracy as the soul of our constitutional mechanisms. But, it has to be kept in mind that democratic liberties should not be misused or taken for granted to serve short term political goals or any person, groups or political parties at the behest of the nation’s long-term needs. Most importantly, when sovereignty is at stake. Second, we- as citizens of this country- have to understand and differentiate between political gimmicks and our real-time needs. And for that, keeping our eyes and ears open is very fundamental to counter any propaganda or narratives. Here, in this case, for example we could have understood that Supreme court is an independent constitutional organ separate from Executive and legislature. Its judgements are purely on the merits of the case and going through the verdict and understanding it before taking the streets would have been prudent. If we understand and start demanding more constructive things, the factions, interest groups and other forms of political and social cohorts are bound to supply and fulfil that. In short, democratic freedoms are to be utilised in a constructive manner.

To be more specific, we can calculate the cost-benefit ratio. Aravallis should be protected-there is a universal agreement on that. It is ecologically irreplaceable. The current definition defines Aravalli hills as those rising at least 100 meters above the surrounding terrain. Keeping in mind the automatic exfoliation of the grand old mountain range and illegal illegal mining that takes place on it, the current definition tries to balance it out to resist illegal mining, explore the possibilities of heavy REE and protecting the larger ecological framework at the same time. Looking from the lens of governance, exploring the HREEs can give the edge in various fields like growth of the EV sector, renewable energy scaling - solar and wind turbines as well as in advance defence sectors like guidance, radar, navigation and communication systems. And looking at the current international system, it is important to distinguish the fact that the idea of ‘interdependence’ and ‘globalisation’ has taken a purely strategic turn. In a world where interdependence has become strategic, path to self-reliance is obviously one of the options.

External Influence, Selective Activism and Question of Intent

In today’s world, where manifold means of exercising power other than conventional military or open confrontation are at hand, impacting domestic policy debates of competitor states or those of strategic importance has become one of those low cost yet effective tools. Over the past decade, the Indian government has been more assertive in flagging concerns that certain foreign-funded non-governmental organisations have, at times, shaped protest ecosystems around infrastructure, mining, and energy projects—often without adequate transparency regarding funding sources or strategic intent. Official assessments, including intelligence-linked inputs cited in parliamentary debates and regulatory actions under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), have argued that foreign funding has occasionally aligned with narratives that delay or derail projects deemed strategically important. Again, these concerns are not framed as an opposition to ecological integrity per se, but rather against what policy makers have termed as ‘selective activism’- where scrutiny disproportionately targets projects in emerging economies while comparable activities in advanced industrial states face far less resistance.

From a geopolitical standpoint, this anxiety is not unfounded. As most of the advanced economies of the current global structure, barring their narratives about renewable energy sources, are still heavily dependent on conventional energy sources. Exploring HREEs in India can cause a major upset to the current world order in the longer run. India’s experience mirrors global patterns. Similar protest-driven delays have been observed in mining and infrastructure projects across Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia, regions rich in strategic resources but politically vulnerable to narrative contestation. This has led strategic analysts to argue that environmental discourse, while legitimate and necessary, can intersect with broader geopolitical competition which is precisely the case here.

From Strategic Vulnerability to Strategic Capacity: What Must Be Done

In order to move beyond the rhetorical commitments to ‘Atmanirbharta’ and to insulate itself from the mineral coercion, the rare earth sector and its importance has to be given its due. The lesson to be learnt from China’s dominance is not just about geological endowments, but about efficiently utilising it in the State’s capacity building, regulatory coherence and long-term vision.

Firstly, India must acknowledge that mining is not the core problem, unregulated mining is. Blanket bans, driven more by optics than outcomes, have failed to stop ecological degradation while discouraging legitimate exploration on the other hand. Whereas, a calibrated framework where scientifically assessed zones are opened for controlled deep-mining, having strict environmental safeguards and real-time monitoring, can be more effective and sustainable alternative.

Secondly, as the classic Indian experience says, public sector dominance without private-sector dynamism constraints innovation and growth. Institutions like the Indian Rare Earths Limited (IREL) have played a critical role historically, but the scale and technological complexity of heavy REE extraction demand new partnerships. Public-Private partnership has to be an obvious way out.

Third, the tribal and local dimension must be addressed with seriousness rather than tokenism. The stakeholders making sacrifices has to be taken into account while sharing the pie of progress. Instreaming them into the mainstream can go a long way in bridging the gaps and creating social coherence in the nation.

And most importantly, For India, therefore, the challenge is twofold: safeguarding democratic space for protest and dissent, while ensuring that national decisions on critical resources are not indirectly shaped by external strategic interests.

Here, India’s civilisational ethos offers a quiet but powerful guide. ‘Dharma’ has never been about extremes; it is about balance, between what we are entitled to and what we owe, between caring for nature and meeting human needs, between short-term comfort and long-term survival. Seen through this lens, resource governance cannot be an exercise in unchecked extraction, nor can it afford to remain frozen in inaction. The real task before us is not to choose one side over the other, but to build institutions that can hold this balance steadily and responsibly over time.