The decision by Chile and the United States to initiate a dialogue mechanism on critical minerals and rare earths has been received by experts as a significant signal amid the growing global dispute over strategic resources.
However, they warn that the announcement raises questions about its scope, geopolitical implications, and the concrete projects that could emerge.
The CEO of Plusmining, Juan Carlos Guajardo, argues that the announcement should be understood in the context of international competition to secure the supply of key raw materials for strategic industries.
“The announcement clearly fits within the context of growing geopolitical competition for critical minerals,” he says. According to Guajardo, the United States—like Europe and Japan—is seeking to secure stable access to resources needed for the energy transition, semiconductors, and defense.
Guajardo emphasizes that the announcement leaves several questions unanswered. “Another relevant question is which minerals are actually the focus of this cooperation,” he notes, recalling that the statement refers generally to critical minerals and rare earths without specifying which ones. A similar view is expressed by Javier Mella, an academic from the Faculty of Engineering at the Universidad de los Andes, who highlights that the announcement reflects a willingness to advance cooperation with Washington. “What is clear is the willingness to cooperate with the U.S. government on issues of great interest to the United States, such as critical minerals and rare earths.”
However, he warns that the true scope of the process has yet to be defined. “Questions remain regarding the final agreements and all the geopolitical implications that an agreement of this kind could have with our main trading partner,” he says.
The geopolitical dimension also appears in the analysis of Maximiliano Villalobos, an academic at the ESE Business School of the same university. In his view, the rapprochement takes place in a context marked by the strategic rivalry between the United States and China.
“What seems to be happening is that as soon as the incoming government takes office, there is an alignment with the United States in response to China’s growing influence,” he argues. The academic maintains that this competition goes beyond economics. “At its core, this is part of a broader competition for global leadership, something many already describe as a kind of Cold War 2.0.”
From a legal perspective, lawyer Luciano Cruz Morandé, a partner at Arteaga Gorziglia, emphasizes that the document signed does not yet constitute a formal agreement. “It is a starting point, not an endpoint: what was signed yesterday is neither a treaty nor a contract—it is a roadmap,” he explains.
The jurist maintains that the key stage begins now. “Signing was the easy step. Now comes the interesting part,” he says, noting that one of the main challenges will be defining what “mutual support in supply” actually entails.
Among the questions that arise, he mentions whether this will involve processing projects, infrastructure financing, or regulatory certainty for new investments. “The answers will determine whether Chile adds value or simply exports more tons of the same mineral as always,” he warns.
From the mining sector, Núcleo Minero CEO Álvaro Merino believes the understanding could be positive for the industry. “Certainly, the recent agreement reached between Chile and the United States on critical minerals is very positive, as it aims precisely to develop secure and reliable mineral supply chains.”
For experts, the true scope of the rapprochement between Santiago and Washington will begin to take shape in the coming weeks, when both governments start technical consultations to evaluate possible areas of cooperation around critical minerals and rare earths.
Source: La Segunda