Commentary: How to Navigate Trump’s Opportunistic Diplomacy

1. On February 4th, a geopolitically crucial but less publicized event occurred in Washington D.C., where U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted the first ministerial meeting focused on critical minerals at the State Department. This event attracted wide international participation, marking it as significant amid the release of the Epstein documents and ongoing global turmoil. [para. 1][para. 2]

2. The summit on critical minerals drew representatives from 54 nations, including major Western powers, resource-rich Latin American and African countries, and the European Union. This broad attendance starkly contrasts with the smaller set of 20 founding members present at the Trump-led “Board of Peace” during the Davos forum for Gaza reconstruction, illustrating enhanced Western alignment amid a period of U.S. diplomatic unilateralism under Donald Trump. [para. 3][para. 4]

3. The primary objective of this meeting was to restructure the global market for critical minerals and rare earths. The goal is to develop a resilient, secure, and diversified supply chain for the U.S. and its allies, reducing reliance on any single supplier. This effort is considered essential due to concerns over the global dominance of China in this sector. [para. 5][para. 9]

4. During the gathering, it was agreed that the U.S. would sign a memorandum of understanding with Japan and the EU within 30 days to collaborate on joint development, refining, processing, and recycling of critical minerals. Similarly, the U.S. and Mexico plan to implement a comparable action plan within 60 days, establishing frameworks for cooperative management and trade in these resources. [para. 6][para. 7]

5. U.S. Vice President JD Vance expressed that the ultimate intention of these initiatives was to create "preferential trade zones" for critical mineral resources. Tools like price floors and tariffs on non-member countries will help curb dumping practices by nations such as China and disrupt Beijing’s dominance, given that China controls an estimated 80% to 90% of key mineral market capacity. [para. 8][para. 9]

6. Underscoring the urgency, the Biden administration announced just days before the summit the launch of a strategic critical minerals reserve, funded with $10 billion from the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. and $2 billion from the private sector. This functions as a minerals counterpart to the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve and aims to buffer against supply disruptions. [para. 10]

7. In Trump’s second term, a marked increase in “America First” policies has surfaced, with incidents such as sovereignty disputes over Greenland and enforcement actions against foreign leaders rattling traditional alliances. Despite these unilateral acts, the administration concurrently pursues initiatives like the “Board of Peace” and the critical minerals summit, indicating selective multilateral engagement. [para. 11][para. 12]

8. This approach, driven by the limits of U.S. power post-Cold War, reflects a pragmatic pursuit of absolute national interests. If unilateralism serves these interests—as in actions regarding Greenland or Venezuela—traditional rules are sidestepped. However, the U.S. willingly collaborates on a case-by-case basis when it bolsters its leadership while distributing burdens. Thus, “America First” translates to America choosing the tune, not acting alone. [para. 13][para. 14][para. 15][para. 16][para. 17]

9. Under this strategy, global governance under Trump has become fragmented, with the administration leaving organizations like the Paris Agreement and WHO, but simultaneously forming new coalitions for specific interests like Gaza and critical minerals. Participation and withdrawal are determined solely by the administration’s strategic priorities. [para. 18][para. 19][para. 20]

10. In response, other nations are also recalibrating: Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney advocates for a coalition of middle powers, while countries in the Global South aim for greater self-reliance. Meanwhile, China is softening its diplomatic posture and moving away from a rigid separation of politics and economics, allowing scope for pragmatic engagement with the West if its core interests remain protected. [para. 21][para. 22][para. 23][para. 24][para. 25]