It expounds on the importance of critical minerals in the competition among major powers, compares the critical mineral lists and supply chain characteristics of China and the US, and points out that the US is incorporating Central Asia into its strategic layout for critical minerals, intending to restructure supply chains and decouple from China. It also reviews the current state of related academic research, points out the inadequacies in the study of the US strategic layout for critical minerals in Central Asia, and clarifies the research direction and content of this paper.

I. The Motivations and Strategic Objectives of the US Strategic Layout for Critical Minerals in Central Asia

It delves into the motivations and strategic objectives of the US strategic layout for critical minerals in Central Asia. The Central Asia region is rich in mineral resources. Based on its own strategic needs, the complementary demands of Central Asia, and the assistance of the external environment, the US is actively advancing its strategic layout in this region. The US's intrinsic strategic and resource needs are the core driving force for cooperation; Central Asia's complementary conditions provide the basis for cooperation; and international factors such as the evolution of the global geopolitical landscape serve as external catalysts for cooperation. The US's strategic objectives are divided into two levels: basic and core. The basic objective is to deeply integrate Central Asian resources to fill gaps in its own supply chains; the core objective is to consolidate its global competitive advantage through critical mineral cooperation. Through a series of specific cooperative measures, the US attempts to achieve control over the entire chain from extraction to transportation and to promote the direct connection of Central Asian minerals with the US domestic manufacturing system. This aims to form a US-Central Asia vertical supply loop, reducing the risk of supply disruptions from the source.

II. Implementation Measures of the US Strategic Layout for Critical Minerals in Central Asia

The US strategic layout for critical minerals in Central Asia, through the establishment of diverse cooperation frameworks, aims to reduce institutional barriers and lower cooperation costs, while consolidating access to scarce mineral resources through trade and investment. In terms of cooperation layout, the US highlights the core positions of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, supplemented by other countries, forming a development path focused on upstream resource control with moderate extension into the midstream and downstream industrial chains. The US mainly advances institutional arrangements at three levels: bilateral, regional, and global, constructing a network of institutional support covering different dimensions of cooperation. The goal is to leverage alignment and collaboration at the institutional level to bring various parties closer, create favorable conditions for policy coordination and process advancement related to critical mineral cooperation, reduce policy obstacles in cooperation, and gradually integrate Central Asia into its critical mineral supply chains and alliance/partner systems. The critical mineral trade between the US and Central Asian countries is characterized by small scale, high concentration, and strong targeting. Its core orientation is to precisely connect with Central Asia's scarce mineral resources around the weak links in the US's own critical mineral supply chains, focusing on ensuring stable supply of core minerals. US investments in Central Asian critical minerals follow a logic of government guidance, policy paving, enterprise leadership, focused priorities, multi-point supplementation, and channel support. This has achieved a strategic shift from traditional oil and gas investments to the critical mineral sector. The layout is also gradually expanding from single-resource extraction towards coordinated advancement in exploration, development, and processing capacity.

III. Constraints on the US Strategic Layout for Critical Minerals in Central Asia

It deeply analyzes the numerous constraints encountered by the US in its strategic layout for critical minerals in Central Asia. From the external environment perspective, the US faces strong resistance from Russia in Central Asia. Russia views Central Asia as its traditional sphere of influence, upgrading strategic partnerships with countries like Kazakhstan and listing energy and minerals as priority cooperation areas to resist US penetration. Simultaneously, China, leveraging initiatives like the Belt and Road, has formed significant differential advantages in the Central Asian critical mineral sector, investing in and operating numerous full industrial chain projects, controlling substantial resources and extraction capabilities. China is closely connected to Central Asia in terms of geography, electricity, finance, etc., with cooperation covering multiple fields, aligning with Central Asia's industrial upgrading needs. Furthermore, US allies like the EU and Japan also cooperate independently with Central Asia, diverting resources and weakening US influence. The five Central Asian countries are deepening internal regional coordination through means like signing memorandums of understanding, enhancing bargaining power, which increases the difficulty for the US to coordinate and lead in the region. At the geopolitical logistics level, transportation channels for Central Asian critical minerals face multiple blockages including major power competition, regional security issues, high transportation costs, and insufficient infrastructure.

The US also has inherent limitations. At the policy level, the US strategy towards Central Asia lacks stability and continuity. While relevant documents mention attention to regional development, they are not implemented, and insufficient importance is given to critical minerals. Policy fluctuations affect confidence in cooperation. The US's long-term interference in Central Asian internal affairs has raised vigilance among local countries. At the industrial and technological level, the US has weak midstream processing capabilities for critical minerals and lacks technological solutions adapted to Central Asia's low-cost development needs. The ESG standards it promotes increase cooperation costs. Difficulty in transferring key technologies to Central Asia means it cannot meet Central Asia's industrial upgrading demands.

There are fundamental divergences in the core demands of both sides. The US views critical mineral cooperation as a geopolitical tool, aiming to weaken the traditional cooperative relationships between China and Russia with Central Asia and consolidate its own strategic presence. In contrast, Central Asian countries, based on national interests and pragmatic principles, pursue a multi-balancing foreign policy with strategic autonomy and economic development as the core guidance. They seek to enhance their negotiating position through diversified cooperation, refusing to take sides in major power competition. Their primary demand in cooperating with the US is economic benefit, desiring full industrial chain cooperation and technology transfer. However, the US currently focuses more on upstream exploration and development. This misalignment of demands hinders deeper cooperation.

Implementation faces multiple sustainability challenges. At the resource and data level, Central Asian ore deposit structures are complex; surveys and assessments of critical mineral reserves are incomplete; some countries do not disclose core geological data, affecting US companies' investment decisions and cooperation planning. At the institutional and policy level, the legal and regulatory systems for the critical minerals industry in Central Asian countries are imperfect, with frequent policy adjustments. US concerns about the local investment environment increase cooperation uncertainty. At the technological and infrastructure level, Central Asian countries have backward technology and aging equipment, with issues like power shortages and uneven water resource distribution. Lagging infrastructure constrains resource development and export. At the ecological and social level, the Central Asian ecological environment is fragile. Large-scale development could cause environmental damage, triggering resource nationalism and social backlash. At the economic feasibility level, large-scale development could lead to a global price crash for critical minerals. Insufficient local market demand in Central Asia makes it difficult to form deep industrial chain synergy with the US, reducing the economic sustainability of cooperation. These constraints intertwine, raising the cost and difficulty of advancing cooperation, limiting its breadth and depth, and adding uncertainty to its prospects.

IV. Impact Analysis of the US Strategic Layout for Critical Minerals in Central Asia

The US strategic layout for critical minerals in Central Asia has produced multifaceted and profound impacts. Firstly, it impacts the global critical minerals landscape, intensifying geopolitical competition, fragmenting global supply chain structures, increasing trade coordination and transaction costs, and threatening supply chain stability. Secondly, it negatively affects the sustainable development of Central Asia and surrounding regions, entrenching Central Asia's resource export-oriented economic structure, exacerbating regional development imbalances, and increasing ecological and environmental risks. Thirdly, it poses challenges to China's development in the critical minerals field and China-Central Asia cooperation, affecting China's global critical mineral supply chain security, weakening China's voice in global mineral governance, squeezing the space for China-Central Asia critical mineral cooperation, but simultaneously prompting an upgrade in the China-Central Asia cooperation model.

V. Conclusion

It points out that although the US has initially established a cooperation framework in its strategic layout for critical minerals in Central Asia, constrained by various factors, it is difficult to achieve an exclusive system or the goal of "de-sinicization." In the future, a pattern of limited presence and multiple competition-cooperation may form, posing potential challenges to China and global mineral supply chains, among others. China needs to take high-quality co-construction of the Belt and Road as the guide, focusing efforts on four areas: institutional binding, industrial chain upgrading, rule coordination, and infrastructure support, to promote China-Central Asia critical mineral cooperation towards deep synergy, safeguarding industrial security and contributing solutions for the sustainable development of global mineral resources.